glory of God and the merits of Christ And therefore the conclusion must needs follow being built vpon an vnmooueable foundation that that Religion which maintaineth such doctrines is not the truth of Christ but the seduction of Antichrist MOTIVE V. That Religion deserueth to be suspected which refuseth to be tryed by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. THe first proposition in this Argument though it be most true and cannot without any shew of reason be contradicted yet that it may be without all doubt and exception it shall not be amisse to strengthen the same by sound and euident proofes deriued both out of Gods word and consent of ancient Fathers The Proposition consists of two parts first that it cannot be the true Religion which will not abide the alone tryall of the Scriptures Secondly that it will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe let vs consider of both these seuerally 2. And concerning the first if the Scripture be the fountaine of all true religion the foundation and basis of our faith the Canon and rule of all the doctrines of faith and the touch-stone to trye truth from falshood then to refuse to be iudged and tryed by the Scriptures alone is plainely to discouer that there is something in it which issued not from that fountain which is not built vpon that foundation which is so oblique and crooked that it dares not to be applyed to that rule and which is counterfeit and dares not abide the touchstone Now that the Scripture is such as I haue said let the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture beare witnesse Search the Scripture saith our Sauiour for in them you thinke to haue eternall life and they be they which testifie of me therefore the Scripture is the fountaine of all true religion for what is the Religion of Christians but the right knowledge of Christ Iesus This caused Saint Paul to say I desire to know nothing but Christ Iesus and him crucified Againe the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation through faith in Christ Iesus and are profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute and perfect to euery good worke Therefore the Scripture is the onely fountaine of true Religion for what is true Religion but spirituall wisedome and holy perfection the one in contemplation the other in action the one in knowledge the other in practice for these two ioyned together do make a man truly religious but the Scriptures afford both as it is cleare in that saying of S. Paul and may be confirmed by another like speech of Salomon who affirmeth that the commandements of God will make a man to vnderstand righteousnesse and iudgement and equity and euery good path Righteousnesse and iudgement pertaine to knowledge equity and euery good path belong to practice And for this cause Origen compareth the Scriptures to Iacobs Well from whence not onely Iacob and his sonnes that is the learned and the skilfull but his sheepe and cattell that is the simple and ignorant doe drinke that is deriue vnto themselues the waters of life and saluation and therefore where the knowledge of the Scriptures flourished not as among all the Heathen both Romanes Grecians and Barbarians before their conuersion there no true Religion shewed it selfe but their Religion was all false and deuillish for in stead of the true God they worshipped dumb creatures and mortall men yea deuils themselues as Lactantius sheweth All which proceeded from hence that they had not the word of God for their guide which is the onely fountaine and well-spring of true Religion 3. Againe as it is the fountaine from whence so it is the foundation vpon which our faith relieth whether wee take faith for the act of beleeuing or for the matter and obiect of our beliefe Ye are built saith S. Paul vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Christ Iesus himselfe being the chiefe corner stone By the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine as all Expositours that I haue read yea their owne Aquinas and Caietane with one consent auouch and to bee built vpon this foundation is to haue our faith to relye and depend vpon it onely as a house relyeth onely vpon the foundation and without a foundation cannot stand that therefore is no doctrine of faith that is vpholden by any other foundation neither hath that any good foundation which is not built vpon the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine they build vpon sand that build vpon humane traditions euery stormy puffe of winde will shake the house of that faith but they which heare the word of Christ and keepe it build vpon a rocke against which neither the raine flouds nor windes no not the gates of hell are able to preuaile because they are grounded vpon the rocke which rocke indeede is Christ to speake properly as not onely S. Peter confesseth 1. Pet. 2. 7. but euen Christ himselfe that is this rocke Math. 16. 18. when hee saith Vpon this rocke will I build my Church that is vpon this truth that Christ is the Sonne of God yet the word of Christ may also be called the rocke because it is as firme and durable as Christ himselfe And that wee may know that Gods word onely is the foundation of faith S. Paul telleth vs plainely that faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God If any of them say as they doe that the word of God is not onely that which is written in Scripture but that which is vnwritten deliuered by tradition let them shew as good reasons to proue their traditions to be the word of God as we doe to proue the Scripture and we will beleeue them but since they cannot let them beare with vs if we vnderstand the Apostles words as spoken onely touching the written word and the rather because we haue for the warrantize of our interpretation both S. Paul himselfe in the same Chapter verse 8. when he saith This is the word offaith which we preach Where hee sheweth what is that word which is the ground of our faith namely the word preached And S. Peter who hauing magnified the word of God with this commendation that it endureth for euer presently expoundeth himselfe of what word hee spake saying And this is that word which is preached amongst you That is the word of the Gospell which was not in part but wholy and fully as preached by mouth so committed to writing And thus S. Basil also interprets it for he saith Quicquid est vltra scripturas Whatsoeuer is out of the Scriptures diuinely inspired because it is not of faith is sinne for faith is by hearing and hearing by
New Testament many things are wanting What can be more plaine Yet Lindanus is more plaine for he calleth Traditionem non scriptam c. The vnwritten tradition that Homericall moly which preserueth the Christian faith against the inchantments of Heretikes and the true touch-stone of true false doctrine and the Aâ—acian buckler to be opposed to all Heretikes and in conclusion the very foundation of faith To this fellow adioyne Melchior Canus as a coÌ„panion in blasphemy who saith That many things belong to Christian faith which are contained in the Scripture neither openly nor obscurely To conclude all in one summe without any further repetition of priuate mens opinions wherein much time might be spent the voyce of their whole Church represented in the Councill of Trent is this That traditions are to bee receaued pari pietate with the same reuerence and affection wherwith wee receiue the Scripture it selfe Thus wee haue a view of the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the insufficiency of the holy Scripture both in part and whole Out of all which these two impious conclusions doe necessarily arise First that traditions vnwritten are equall if not superiour in dignity and authority to the written word of God and secondly that without the helpe of them it is not able to bring vs either to a sauing faith in this life or to the end of our faith in the life to come then both which what could be spoken more iniurious either to the Word it self or to the Maiestie of that Spirit from whom it proceeded And that their blasphemy might be known â—o all men Bellarmine more like a Iulian then a Christian doth not onely affirme the Scripture to be vnsufficient and imperfect but also not simply necessary and to that end he maketh a good round discourse and bringeth in long Leaden arguments which indeed are not worth the answering for they are meere sophisticall collusions as any one of meane iudgement may easily discerne Neuerthelesse by this we may see what an honourable opinion and affection these fellowes beare towards the Scripture when as they dare to affirme that they are not simply necessary but may bee wanting and remoued without any great hurt to the Church of God 12. The third iniurious doctrine whereby open disgrace is offered to the holy Scripture is concerning the authority thereof compared with the Church for this they teach and hold That the authority of the Scripture doth depend vpon the Church and not the Church vpon the Scripture And so by consequent that the Scripture is inferiour to the Church and not the Church to the Scripture whereas we on the contrary affirme and defend that the Church wholly dependeth both for authoritie and existency vpon the Scripture and so is euery way inferiour to the Scripture and not the Scripture vpon the Church 13. This blasphemie of theirs may more euidently be discerned if we obserue what they vnderstand by the Church to wit not the Primitiue Church which was in the time and immediately after the Apostles but the succeeding and present Church and that not the whole Catholicke Church which is dispersed ouer the world but the Church of Rome which holdeth vpon the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and in this Church not the whole body but the Pastours and Prelates assembled in a Councill yea and lastly not the Councill neither but the Pope who is totus in toto all in all and in whome all the members meete and resolue themselues as lines in the center as is before declared This is their Church and to this Church of theirs they subiect the Scriptures euen the word of God to the Pope of Rome that is God himselfe to a mortall sinnefull man For as Nilâ—â— the Archbishop of Thessalonica saith To accuse the Scripture is to accuse God so to debase the Scripture is to debase God 14. That wee may see this to be true and that wee lay no false imputation to their charge heare them speake in their owne words and let Bellarmine leade the Ring If we take away saith he the authoritie of the present Church and of the Councill of Trent then the whole Christian faith may bee called in question for the truth of all ancient Councils and of all poynts of faith depend vpon the authority of the present Church of Rome Marke he saith not vpon the authority of the Scripture but of the present church of Rome where he doth manifestly preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture not onely of the Church but of the Church of Rome as if there were no Church but that and not the Church of Rome as it was in the purer and primer times but the present Church corrupted and depraued with infinite errours Againe in another place he concludeth That the Scriptures doe depend vpon the Church and not the Church on the Scriptures which position he confesseth in the same place to haue beene in other places maintained by him And yet elsewhere he disclaimeth this opinion as none of theirs and calleth it a blasphemy that it is his I haue shewed already though he be ashamed of it as he may well be and therefore exore suo by his owne iudgement he and all the rest are guilty of most grosse and intolerable blasphemie But that you may see that it is the generall receiued doctrine of them all for the most part heare others as well as him vttering their spleene against the Scriptures Siluester Prierias saith that Indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authority of the Scripture but by the authority of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater And againe That the Scripture draweth it strength and authority from the Church and Bishop of Rome Eckius saith that the Scripture was not authentical but by the authority of the Church and putteth this proposition among hereticall assertions The authority of the Scripture is greater then the Church Pighius also affirmeth the same that all the authoritie of Scriptures doth necessarily depend vpon the authority of the Church and calleth all that hold the contrary in scorne Scriptuarij that is Scripture-men or such as maintaine the Scripture Cardinall Hosius goeth further and commendeth a blasphemous speech of one Hermannus as a godly saying That the Scriptures are of no more force then Aesops Fables without the testimonie of the Church and addeth presently of his owne that vnlesse the Churches authority did commend vnto vs the Canonicall Scripture it should bee of little account with vs. The like is deliuered by Coclaeus by Canus Stapleton Andradius Canisius and generally all other of that side that handle that question 15. Onely to palliate the matter they bring in a distinction to wit that this dependance of the Scriptures authority vpon the Church is quoad nos in respect of vs not quâ—adse in respect of it selfe and declaratiuè for declaration sake
haue with this secret meaning to tell it thee or at this time or some such like things And if an husband aske his wife whether shee be an adulteresse she may answere no though she be with this mentall reseruation to reueale it to him and if a man be constrained to sweare that he will take a woman to his wife he may doe it safely although he neuer meane it with this close clause in his mind if she shall after please him Thus farre Tollet 6. Now of late dayes one hath divulged a whole Treatise in defence of this monstrous doctrine to the which Blackwell the Arch-priest hath giuē this solemne approbatiō that it is a very godly learned Catholique Tractate worthy to be published in print to the comfort of the afflicted instructiō of the godly The author of this Tractate thus concludeth If a Catholike or any other person shal be demanded vpon his oath before a Magistrate whether a Priest be in such a place he may though hee know the contrary securely in conscience answere No without periury with a secret meaning reserued in his mind namely that he is not there so as a man is bound to reueale him Againe if one shall aske me whether such a stranger lyeth in my house I may answere he lyeth not in my house albeit he do meaning Non mentitur this last is verball equiuocation the former is mentall reseruation which are the two approued kindes of their equiuocating art 7. If this filthy strumpet be not the mother of two foule daughters Lying and Periury lying if by a bare asseueration periury if ioyned with an othe let all that haue but common sense and reason iudge and let the Enquest that shall enquire into this matter be first heathen Philosophers secondly the Popish writers themselues thirdly the Fathers and Doctours of the Church and fourthly which is of greater moment then all the rest the holy Scripture of God diuinely inspired and cannot deceiue nor be deceiued Let vs heare the Philosophers verdict A Lye saith Tully is a false enunciation of words with an intent to deceaue and againe he defines dolus malus that is deceit to be when one thing is pretended another acted this is a false action So in like manner a false diction which is a lye must needs bee when one thing is spoken by the mouth another vnderstood in the heart therefore the ordinary Grammaticall notation of this word mentiri to lye is quasi contra mentemire as it were to goe against the minde and Aristotle sayth that speech is ordained for this cause to signifie and expresse the secret conceptions of the mind therfore when the mouth and the mind are at variance then the law of nature is peruerted and in stead of a naturall and true-borne childe Truth a bastard to wit a lye is produced But they which equiuocate pretend one thing and intend another they speake one thing meane another their heart and their tongue like vntuned strings are at iarre with themselues and therefore by no meanes can they be excused from open and notorious lying 8. Now if an oath bee mixed then a fouler monster is brought forth euen Periury for what is periurie but according to their own diuinity a lye made in an oath and is not equiuocating when the equiuocator is sworne to speake the truth periury Let Tully determine this doubt if it bee a doubt Not to sweare a falshood is to bee forsworne but not to performe or make good that which thou hast sworne according to thine owne meaning as customably it is conceiued by thy words is periury all the world cannot more directly cut the throat of all equiuocation then this doth 9. But I leaue the Philosophers and come to their owne Schoolemen To lye saith Lumbard is when a man speaketh any thing contrary to that which he thinketh in his mind It is a lye saith Aquinas when a man will signifie another thing then that which he thinketh in his mind Againe Lumbard Whosocuer vseth craft or subtiltie in an oath defileth his conscience with a double guilt for he both taketh the name of God in vaine and also deceiueth his neighbour And Aquinas their great Doctor condemneth in expresse words this equiuocating tricke of theirs If a Iudge saith he shall require any thing which he cannot by order of law the party accused what may he equiuocate No. he is not bound to answere in deed but either by appeale or some other meanes may deliuer himselfe but in no case may be tell a lye or vse falshood or any kind of craft or deceit This was then good diuinity but now the Iesuites our pretended resiners of Popery haue coyned a new kind of diuinity but like counterset slips it will not abide the tryall Heare what Scotus saith another Schooleman Dicere non feci c. To say I did not that which I know I haue done although I speake it with this reseruation that I may signifie it to you is not equiuocation but a plaine lye To conclude with Maldonate Quisquis fingendo c. Whosoeuer saith he by saining doth goe about to deceiue another although he intend some other thing in his mind without doubt lyeth for otherwise there would be no lye which might not by this meanes be defended 10. Thus we haue the verdict of diuers of their own Writers touching this monstrous doctrine Let vs heare now what the Fathers thinke of it and let Saint Hierome speake first None is a lyer saith he but he that thinks otherwise then he speaketh Therfore the equiuocator is a lyar for he thinketh otherwise then he speaketh as when he affirmeth I am no Priest when he is one he thinketh hee is that which he saith he is not Is Saint Augustine of a contrary minde no hee agreeth with Hierome in this though they iarred in some other things He that speaketh saith he falsly against his conscience doth properly lye but so doth our equiuocator And for Periury This saith Augustine is the very forme of Periurie to thinke that to be false which thou dost sweare Thus doth the equiuocatour for when hee sweareth hee knoweth not a man and yet knoweth him doth hee not manifestly thinke that to be false which he sweareth his mentall reseruation cannot saue him from the pillory seeing as Isidore saith God doth valew an oath not by the sense of the speaker but according to the sense of him to whom the oath was made Thus by the verdict of these three Fathers their doctrine of equiuocation is guilty both of lying and periury 11. And that I may leaue them without a starting hole let them heare what the Iury of Life and Death saith I meane the holy Prophets and Apostles yea what GOD the Iudge himselfe saith Thou shalt not saith he Beare false witnesse against thy Neighbour No nor of thy neighbour therfore much lesse
the word of God Now from hence thus I reason If the word of God written be the onely ground of faith then that Religion which will not acknowledge it dependance onely vpon the word written is not to be beleeued but to be suspected as erronious but the word written is the onely ground of faith as hath beene proued therefore that Religion which disclaymeth it dependance only vpon the word deserues iustly not to be beleeued but to be suspected as erronious And in this regard the Romish Religion though it be in our Pater noster to wit vnder the last petition Deliuer vs from euill yet it should neuer come into our Creed to repose our faith and our saluation vpon it 4. Thirdly the Scripture as it is the fountaine and foundation of true Religion So it is the rule of faith and the touchstone of doctrines and the ballance of the Sanctuarie to weigh truth and falshood in that the one may be discerned from the other This the Prophet Esay teacheth when hee calleth vs to the Law and to the Testimonie saying that if any speake not according to that word there is no light in them From which place thus I reason that whereunto we must resort in all controuersies and doubts for resolution that is the rule of faith but such is the Scripture by the testimonie of the Prophet therefore the Scripture is the rule of faith In like manner we may conclude out of S. Peter who saith that We haue a more sure word of the Prophets whereunto wee must take heede as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place till the Day-starre arise in our hearts If the word of the Prophets was a sure direction to the Church of God before the Gospell was written then much more is the whole Scripture contayning the word of the Prophets and of the Apostles together but S. Peter affirmeth the first therefore the second must needs follow For this cause when one asked our Sauiour what hee might doe to bee saued hee referred him to the Scripture for his direction What is written how readest thou And so Abraham referreth the rich gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets and Christ telleth the Saduces that this was the cause of their errour because they knew not the Scriptures Out of all which Texts thus I argue If there were any other rule of faith besides the sacred Scripture our Sauiour and Saint Peter would neuer haue sent vs ouer to the Scripture alone but would haue poynted out vnto vs some other meanes but they send vs to the Scripture alone and therefore that alone is the rule and ballance of our faith 5. And this the very title and inscription of the Scripture doth intimate for why is it called Canonicall but because it containes the Canon that is the rule of faith and life The Fathers with one consent agree in this truth Saint Basil calls the Scripture Canonem recti normam veritatis The Canon of right and the rule of truth Chrysostome sayth that Assertio diuinarum legum c. The assertion of the law of God is a most exact Ballance Squire and Rule Saint Augustine calleth it Statera diuina Gods ballance or a diuine ballance these bee his words Non afferamus stateras dolosas Let vs not bring deceitfull ballances to weigh what we will and how we will saying This is heauie that is light but let vs bring that diuine ballance out of the holy Scriptures as it were out of the Lords treasurie and by it weigh all things or rather acknowledge them being weighed by the Lord. Tertullian giueth to the Scripture the same name so doth Gregory Nyssen and our Countriman venerable Bede to passe ouer all the rest as he is reported by Gratian in his decrees telleth vs in most plaine termes that In sacris literis vnica est credendi pariter viuendi regula praescripta The onely rule both of Faith and Life is prescribed vnto vs in the holy Scriptures Now if this be so as it is meere madnesse to affirme the contrary then that religion which doth refuse to be tryed by this rule and to be weighed in this ballance doth giue iust cause of suspition that it is but light stuffe and crooked ware 6. If a man should offer to his creditor a piece of gold for payment and should refuse to haue it either tryed by the touch-stone or weighed in the ballance he might iustly suspect that it was but either light or counterfeit so may any of good sense rightly suspect that religion to bee both light and counterfet which refuseth to be examined by the rule of Gods word especially which is the second branch of the first proposition if it not onely refuse to be tryed by the Scripture but also will admit no tryall nor Iudge but it selfe for as by reason wee conclude that such a man hath an euill cause in hand who in Westminster Hall refuseth to haue his matter tryed by the law and will admit no Iudge but his own opinion that man to be guilty which standing at the bar of iustice accused of some great crime denyeth to be tryed by the verdict of his Country according to the law so likewise the cause of Religion being called in question that must needs in any equall iudgement bee deemed vnsound and guilty which will not stand to the verdict and sentence of the Prophets and Apostles who are the Iury to trye all cases of conscience and of the Spirit of God speaking in the Scripture who is the onely Iudge to heare and determine all questions of doubt which may arise in matters of faith and will be censured and iudged by none but it selfe 7. Against this truth all the Romanists and especially the Iesuites and of the Iesuites chiefly Bellarmine conflict and fight with foote and horse sailes and oares tooth and naile and all they can doe for herein lyeth the very bloud and life of their Religion And if this bee wrung from them that the Scripture is the onely iudge and rule of faith Actum est de regno Pontificio The Romish kingdome goeth to wracke vtterly and therefore they mainely contend to proue first that the Scripture is not the Iudge of controuersies secondly that it is not properly the rule of faith and if it bee a Iudge it is a dumbe one that cannot speake and if it be a Rule it is a partiall and imperfect one not totall and absolute 8. These two positions Bellarmine laboureth to prooue by many sorts of Arguments first from testimonies of the Olde Testament secondly from testimonies of the New thirdly by the authority of Bishops and Emperours fourthly by the witnesse of the Fathers lastly by reason I passe ouer the foure first sorts of Arguments as being sufficiently answered by others and come to the last which are deriued from reason the slightnesse whereof doth plainely discouer the vanity of this their opinion
Now to proue that the Scripture cannot be the iudge of Controuersies nor the Interpreter of it selfe they vse three chiefe reasons first because it hath diuers senses secondly because it is not able to speake but is mute and dumbe and thirdly because in euery well ordered Common-wealth the Law and the Iudge are distinguished and therefore seeing the Scripture is the law therefore it cannot be the Iudge 9. I answere to the first that it is not onely false but impious to affirme that the Scripture is as it were A nose of wax flexible into many senses as Melchior Canus affirmeth or that it may be dinersly expounded according to the occasion of the time as Cardinall Cusanus auerreth or that it is like a Delphian Sword to be conuerted into many senses as Turrian the Iesuite maketh it for as of one body there is but one soule so of one place of Scripture there is but one true sound sense which is the soule and life of it the words being but the flesh and the skinne that couereth the same and that true sense is that which the Spirit of God intendeth and not that which euery priuate spirit collecteth and deduceth out of the same as for the Tropologicall Anagogicall and Allegoricall senses they are not distinct senses of the Scripture but diuers collections and applications issuing out of one and the same sense all which may bee intended by the Holy Ghost vnder that one literall sense For example when an Allegory is deduced out of a place of Scripture as Saint Paul Gal. 4. 24. doth allegorize that History of Abrahams two Wiues it is not a double interpretation of that History but it is onely an Allegoricall application of it to the illustrating of the matter which he had in hand and so when by a tropologie a morall doctrine is deriued out of a text of Scripture as our Sauiour doth Math. 12. 41. 42. applying to the Iewes the repentance of the Niniuites and the long iourney of the Queene of Saba to see and heare Salomon or when as by a type any thing in Scripture is mystically expounded otherwise then the literall sense doth beare this is not a new sense but an accommodation of the right sense to another purpose which notwithstanding is intended by the spirit of God and this is confessed by diuers of their owne side Cornelius Agrippa thus writeth The Scripture hath but one simple and constant sense in which alone the truth is found And Aquinas thus It is the literall sense which the author of the Scripture intendeth which is God yet it is not inconuenient if in one letter of the Scripture according to the literall sense there bee many senses 10. But grant that there are diuers distinct senses of some few places of Scripture to wit one literall and another spirituall for in the most there is not yet there can be but one literall sense as many of the Iesuites themselues confesse and from that onely a forcible argument may be drawne as Bellarmine acknowledgeth and Vega another Iesuite except the mysticall sense be explaned and authorized by some other expresse place of Scripture as Salmeron Azorius Sixtus Senensis and Polidore Virgil auouch and proue the same by the testimonie of Augustine and Ierome Now then why should the multiplicity of senses barre the Scripture from being the Iudge of controuersies seeing no controuersie can effectually be decided by any other sense but by the literall which is euer one and the same or by the mysticall so farre forth as it is approued and declared by another Scripture which then becomes the literall sense of that place wherein it is expounded though it was spiritually included in the barke of the former from whence it was deriued This therefore is a most vaine and friuolous obiection 11. To the second that the Scripture is dumb and therefore cannot bee the Iudge because the Iudge of controuersies must haue a deciding and determining voyce I answere that this is blasphemy against the sacred word of God for if the Scripture bee an Epistle of the omnipotent God to his creature as Gregory calleth it what doth it but speake to them to whom it is sent He that writes a letter to his friend doth hee not speake vnto him and hee that reades his friends letter doth hee not vnderstand his meaning and intendment because the letter doth not vtter a voyce and he heareth not his friend himselfe Doth not euery man know that there is a double word verbum dictum a word spoken and verbum scriptum a word written the one being Imago cordis the Image of the minde the other Imago oris the Image of the speech True it is the Scripture doth not speake as man speaketh but yet it speaketh as the Law vseth to speake and God himselfe speaketh in the Scripture to them that haue eares to heare him and therefore in the Epistles to the Churches which were all written not spoken it is said Let him that hath an eare heare what the Spirit saith vnto the Churches and is there any thing more common then these phrases what saith the Scripture doth not the Scripture say Yea and is not the Scripture called viâ—us Dei sermo the liuely word of God Heb. 4. 12. how can it speake if it bee dumbe how can it giue life if it be dead 12. This manifest truth Stapleton striueth to elude by a witty as he thinkes but indeed a witlesse distinction God saith he speaketh indeed by the Scripture but hee speaketh not vnto vs by them the Scripture is indeed the word of God but the Church is the voyce of God Which fond obiection our famous Country-man the scourge of Poperie Doctor Whitaker thus wipeth away If God speake in the Scripture then hee doth it either with himselfe or vnto some other but not with himselfe therefore to some other and if to some other to whom but vnto man for hee neither speaketh to Angels nor Deuils nor dumb creatures therefore onely to man as when he saith Thou shalt not kill or Loue your enemies there is no man so simple but hee perceiueth that God speaketh vnto man And therefore the Apostle saith that whatsoeuer things are written aforetime are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might haue hope And so it is cleare that God by the Scripture not onely speaketh but speaketh vnto vs and so the Scripture is not onely the word of God but the voyce of God in it selfe as it proceeded from God the voyce of God to vs as we haue it by writing the word of God and the Epistle of the great King to his poore subiects whereby they are enformed of his will and pleasure and directed in the wayes of saluation 13. I but when the question is about the sense of a Text as of that Math. 16. 19. To thee will I giue the keyes
that are inferiour Iudges are but the Ministers of the law of God and must not vary from the rule thereof in any respect And for this cause as the Iewes were commanded to obey the sentence and determination of the Priest in all controuersies so the Priest was commanded to giue iudgement according to the law and no otherwise and albeit the Hebrew glosse vpon that Text teacheth that if the Priest say that the right hand is the left or the left is the right his sentence is to be holden which is the plaine doctrine of the Church of Rome Iudaizing in this as in many other things yet Lyra writing vpon that Text saith that the glosse is manifestly false because the sentence of no man of what authority soeuer is to be holden if it be contrary to the law of God so we admit the Church to be Iudge and euery priuate Christian also in his place but we ascribe the chiefe power and authority of Iudging to the Scripture alone The next place we allow vnto the Church and the lowest vnto the particular members thereof These last to be directed by the Church but yet so farre as it bringeth it authority out of the Scriptures and it to be limited by the bounds of the Scripture also and if it iudge against the euidence thereof not to bee heard nor beleeued This is our opinion that wee may not be mistaken but our aduersaries aduance their Church vnto the highest place and make the Scripture an inferiour vassall and seruant vnto it as I haue declared 30. Secondly note thereason that moueth them thus to disclaime from the iudgement of the Scripture it is because they know full well that the maynest and chiefest poynts of their Religion wherein they dissent from vs haue no ground nor foundation in the Scripture but would vanish like a morning aust if the light of Gods word should but shine vpon them as for instance their doctrines of worshipping Images of tasting dayes of prayer for the dead of Purgatorie of shrift of pardons of the communion in one kinde of single life and of the priuate Masse and such like all which poynts and many other their owne Writers contesse cannot be sufficiently proued out of the Scripture And therefore Andradius doth fully and ingenuously acknowledge that many poynts of their Religion would reele and stagger if they were not supported by tradition and Bellarmine himselfe saith that it may be doubted whether the great poynt of transubstantiation may be sufficiently enforced out of the words of the Text Hoc est corpus meum So that wee see now the reason why they will not be tried by the Scriptures euen this because if the Scripture bee Iudge Popery must needes goe to wracke This is ther fore a cunning and witty policie or rather a grosse and palpable subtilty of theirs whereby though they dazle the sight of the simple and ignorant yet they cannot bleare the eyes of the vnderstanding and wise from discerning into their fraud 31. Hauing thus proued that they reiect the Scripture now I come to shew that they allow of no other Iudges but themselues for the proofe whereof there needes no long discourse seeing it is sufficiently apparent by that which hath already beene deliuered that they appeale from the sentence of the Scripture vnto the iudgement of the Church and tye vnto the girdle thereof the onely key of interpretation Now by the Church they intend first the Romish Synagogue that is all that whole bony which dependeth vpon the Pope for their head and receiue as it were life and nourishment by his influence for as Bristo saith the Romane Church is the Catholike Church and as the Rhemists the Catholike and the Roman faith is all one Secondly by the Church they meane more particularly a congregation of Romish Bishops and Prelates assembled together in a Councill which they call the Church representatiue And thirdly and principally they intend by the Church the Pope who is the head of the Church and contayneth in him virtually all the power and authority of the Church The Church in the first sense is not to be this Iudge say they nor yet in the second which notwithstanding is but an vpstart opinion and but of the first head for in the Councils of Constance and Basil it was decreed that the Pope should obey the Councill and be ordered by it in all things pertayning to faith and the reformation of the 〈…〉 and many learned Romanists haue been of the same opinion as Bellarmine confesseth but now neither may the Councill be Iudge therefore take the Church in the third sense for the Pope and then you haue the man that is the Church virtuall and must be all in all euen the only Iudge and Vmpier in all controuersies The center in which all the lines that is opinions of Fathers Councils and Diuines must concurre and meete The Epitome and abridgement of the whole Church in whom alone remayneth the whole power of the Catholike Church And thus from the Scripture they call vs to the Church from the Church to the Councils and from them to the Pope and there they pitch their line as in the highest poynt of resolution 32. That they thus vnderstand by the Church the Pope and that all iudgement is deuolued vnto him alone heare them speake in their owne persons Bellarmine saith that the Pope without a Councill may define matters of faith because being the vniuersall Pastor and Teacher of the Church he cannot erre teaching out of the chaire and that he is absolutely aboue the Councill and that he may as he is the chiefe Prince of the Church retract the iudgement of the Councill and not follow the greater part And therefore when hee affirmeth in another place that the Pope with a Councill is the Iudge of the true sense of the Scripture he foysteth in the word Councill for a flourish but indeede hee meaneth the Pope alone for if the Pope be aboue all Councils and may establish or disanull their decrees at his pleasure then is not hee with a Councill but without a Councill the chiefe Iudge 33. Gregory of Valence is more plaine By the Church saith he we meane her head that is to say the Romane Bishop in whom resideth the full authority of the Church the Iesuite Coster after he hath discarded the Scripture from being Iudge because it is Res sine anima sensu in varias pugnantesque sent entias distracta A thing without life and sense distracted into diuers and contrary opinions saith that Penes Ecclesiā Cathelicā est indicium veritatis The iudgement of the truth is belonging to the Catholike Church but because the whole Church cannot meete together in one place without great inconueniences Therefore God hath appoynted and nominated one man to wit the Pope to whom he hath so tyed his presence and spirituall grace that in question◠of
at large discoursed in the former Chapter touching the chiefe Iudge of controuersies for when as they disable the Scripture from that office and exalt the Church that is the Pope as I haue shewed into the highest throne of iudgement what doe they else but debase the Scripture in subiecting it to the Popes wil and making it a vassall to wayt vpon his pleasure and giuing a greater certainty and infallibility to the determinations of his mouth speaking out of his chayre then vnto the infallible and certaine light of truth shining in the Scriptures This is open wrong to the Scriptures and not onely to it but also to the Spirit of God the Author and Enditer thereof for they which set vp the Pope as an all-sufficient and most competent Iudge and pull downe the Scripture as non-sufficient and incompetent as the Romanists doe doe they not aduance the one and disgrace the other as on the contrary we which ascribe all conâ—petencie of right and sufficiencie of power to the Scripture and denie the same to the Pope doe we not disgrace him and aduance it This is the difference in this poynt betwixt them and vs and their Religion and ours and that men may see how little estimation they haue of the Scripture compared with their Pope though the Pope be a man vtterly vnlettered ignorant euen of the grounds of Grammar much more of the grounds of Diuinitie as some of them were though he be a childe of tenne yeeres of age as Bennet the ninth or a mad Lad not past eighteene yeeres old as Iohn the twelfth though he be an Atheist as was Leo the tenth or a Coniurer as Iulius the third Lastly though hee were a man destayned with all manner of filthy and lewd conuersation as a number of them were yet his iudgement must bee heard and preferred because forsooth quatenus Papa as he is Pope he cannot erre though quatenus homo as he is a man hee be an Heretike or an Atheist or a wicked wretch or because Papa est doctor vtriusque legis authoritate non scientia The Pope is Doctour of both lawes in authority and not in knowledge And thus by their Religion the holy and sacred Scripture must giue place and bow the knee to an vnholy sacrilegious and ignorant Pope oftentimes and acknowledge him as Iudge and submit it selfe to his sentence and censure 8. The second doctrine of theirs whereby they disgrace and wrong the Scripture is that touching the insufficiency and imperfection thereof for they are not ashamed to say that the Scripture is imperfect and vnsufficient of it selfe and that in it are not contained all things needfull to saluation but that a great part yea the greatest part of true Religion is grounded vpon tradition without the which the Church of GOD could not bee sufficiently instructed either in faith or manners this is their goodly doctrine whereas we on the other side hold and maintaine that the Canonicall Scripture containeth in it sufficiently plainely and abundantly all doctrines necessary to be knowne for the attainment of saluation whether they be positions of faith or directions for godlinesse and that thereis no neede of any vnwritten traditions for the suppliance of any want or defect which is found therein And herein we haue not onely all the ancient Fathers of the primitiue and purer times of the Church our Abbetters as Iraeneus Origen Athanasius Basil Chrysostome Cyril Tertullian Cyprian Augustine Hierome as you may see in the places quoted in the Margent but also the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures plainely and directly affirming the same 9. That this imputation of imperfection and insufficiency is layd by them vpon the Scripture let vs heare themselues acting their owne parts and first Bellarmine the Ringleader He in his fourth Booke De verbo Dei and fourth Chapter sets downe this position that the Scriptures without traditions are not simply necessary nor sufficient and throughout that whole Chapter doth nothing else but labour to prooue the same by many arguments and reasons as if hee were not content barely to affirme so high a blasphemy but euen as the Poet sayth Cum ratione insanire To be madde with reason and so are all his reasons there vsed in very deed mad reasons which my purpose is not to spend time in confuting that being sufficiently performed by our great and learned Champions of the truth which as yet remaine vnanswered onely it is inough for my intent to discouer to all men his notable blasphemy against the holy Scriptures which not onely in that place but in many other euidently and impudently sheweth it selfe 10. Next vnto him comes in another great Iesuite Gregorie de Valentia and he playeth his part and sayth That the most fittest way of deliuering the doctrine of faith to the Church was this not that all should bee committed to writing but that some things should be deliuered viua voce that is by tradition But Cardinall Hosius more plainly and boldly affirmeth That the greatest part of the Gospell is come to vs by tradition and that very title of it is committed to writing Yea it is reported of him that he should say Melius actum fuisse cum Ecclesia si nullum extaret scriptum Euangelium That it had beene better for the Church if there were no written Gospell extant O blasphemy and yet wisely spoken if so be by the Church hee meaneth the Church of Rome as without doubt hee doth But let vs heare another of the same stampe Eckius I meane that peremptory Bragadochio he steps forth and shoots his bolt in a moment The Lutherans are dolts sayth hee which will haue nothing beleeued but that which is expresse Scripture or can be prooued out of Scripture for all things are not deliuered manifestly in the Scriptures but very many are left to the determination of the Church Coster another Stage-player of theirs comes in and diuides the word into three parts to wit That which God himselfe writ as the tables of the Law that which he commanded others to write as the Olde and the New Testament and that which he neither writ himselfe nor rehearsed to others but left it to themselues as traditions the decrees of Popes and Councils And then he concludeth blasphemously that many things of faith are wanting in the two former neither would Christ haue his Church depend vpon them but this latter is the best scripture the Iudge of controuersies the Expositor of the Bible and that whereupon we must wholly depend His words are these Omnia fidei mysteria ccaeeraque credita scitu necessaria â—n corde Ecclesiae sunt clarissimè exarata in membranis tamen tam noui quam veteris Testaments multa defiderantur that is All the mysteries of faith and other things necessary to bee beleeued and known are most clearely engrauen in the heart of the Church but in the leaues of the Olde and
not effectiuè as the cause thereof which distinction first implieth a contradiction for the authority of a thing is quoad extra in respect of others not quoad intra in respect of it selfe that is rather to be termed dignitie and excellencie then authority secondly that being granted yet it importeth a falshoode in them and concludeth directly our purpose for by it the last resolut on of our faith should not bee into the Scripture but into the authority of the Church which is contrary both to truth and to their owne principles For why doe they attribute that infallible authority to the Church but because the Scripture saith so as they themselues acknowledge And then to affirm that the Church is of greater authority in respect of vs is sufficient to â—uince that in respect of vs they preferre the Church before the Scripture What is this but to offer open iniury and disgrace to the holy Scripture especially seeing a Iesuite of their own is bold to say that a man may mordicus tenere and propugnare acerrimè strongly hold stoutly maintaine a doctrine contrary to the word of God and yet bee no Heretike vnlesse the opposite to that opinion be defined by the Church in his time 16. The fourth and last doctrine whereby they offer iniurie to the Scripture is this That the Pope may dispense with the Law of God This the Popes vassals do not onely affirme but euen confirme and auouch For thus they teach Potestas in diuinas leges ordinariè in Romano Pontifice residet Power ouer the lawes of God remaineth ordinarily in the Pope of Rome and that the Pope may dispense against the Apostles yea against the new Testament vpon great cause and also against all the precepts of the olde Testament The reason whereby they confirme this braue doctrine is this that where the reason of the law faileth there the Pope may dispense but the reason of the law always faileth where he iudgeth it to faile for speaking definitiuely he cannot erre therefore the Pope may dispense with the precepts of the Olde New Testament where and when he list Now what can be more iniurious to the Scripture then this for first they set the Pope aboue the scriptures because he that taketh vpon him to dispense with the law of another challengeth to himselfe a greater authority then the other according as their owne rule is In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior The inferiour may not dispense with the commandement of the superiour Secondly they equall him to God himselfe for whereas there is no exception nor exemption from the law of God but this Nisi deus aliter voluerit Except God otherwise appoynt they instead thereof put in this exception Nisi Papa aliter voluerit And lastly they make the law of God a maimed an imperfect law in that as their diuinity is it cannot giue sufficient direction to mans life for practice of duties and auoyding of sinnes in all cases without the Poprs dispensation and the interposition of his superwise authority 17. From their iniurious doctrines lâ—t vs come to their malicious practice against the Scripture that both by their precepts and practice their enmity to the Scriptures may fully appeare First therefore whereas the language wherein the Scriptures were originally written is indeed the true Scriptures because that is the immediate dialect of the holy Ghost and the translations of it into other tongues are no farther to bee regarded then as they agree with the originall yet the Church of Rome in the Councill of Trent hath canonized the vulgar Latine aboue the Hebrew and Greeke and hath â—nâ—oyned it onely to be vsed in all readings disputations sermons and expositions and not to be reiected vnder any pretence whatsoeuer vpon paine of Anathema Yea Bellarmine with the rest of that crue accuse the Greeke and Hebrew of many corruptions and iustifie the vulgar Latine aboue them as most free from corruptions whereas notwithstanding for one corruption which they would saine fasten vpon them there are to be found twenty in this and that by the confession of many learned of their owne side 18. Besides those corruptions which are supposed to be in the originals are either none at all as may easily be prooued and is already sufficiently by our learned Diuines or else such as are not of that weight to derogate from the perfection of the Scripture in things pertaining to faith and good manners as Posseuine and Sixtus Senensis confesse or at least are but errours of the Writers which no Booke is free from growing either from humane infirmity or from the mistaking of the letters in the Greeke and prickes in the Hebrew which last is but a late inuention of the Massorites and no essentiall part of the Text whereas on the contrary the errours which are extant iâ— the vulgar Latine are many of them contrary to the grounds of faith as that one for all in the third of Genesis where the Latine readeth ipsa conteret caput tuum she shall bruise thy head which they apply vnto the Virgin Marie being in the originall ipse his and in the Septuagâ—nt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Hee vnderstanding Christ our Sauiour Here wee see a fundamentall poynt of saith ouerthrowne not onely in accommodating a Prophecy of Christ vnto the Virgin his mother but also in ascribing vnto her the worke of our RedeÌ„ption signified by the bruising of the Serpents head And as in this so in many other places which I willingly for breuitie sake â—uerpasse And yet for all this by their doctrine and practice their Latine Translation is onely authenticall Yea so impudent is a Bishop of theirs that setting forth the Bible in diuers Languages he placeth the vulgar Latine betwixt the Hebrew and the Greeke as Christ betwixt two theeues as blasphemouslâ— he speaketh This is therefore a notable iniuricus practice of theirs against the Scripture 19. To which adde second no whâ—t inferiour to the former which â—â— their forbidding the Scripture to bee translated into the mother tongue of euery Nation to the end that it may be to the common people as a Booke sealed vp and that they might not reade nor be exercised therein This prohibition is both contrary to the practice of all the Saints of God both vnder the Law and the Gospell for it was their daily exercise to meditate vpon the Law of God continually and to search the Scriptures whether those things which they heard were so or no and to the plaine precept of Christ and the Apostle bidding vs to search the Scriptures and to haue the word of God to dwell plentiously in vs and to the doctrine of all the ancient Fathers who with one consent exhort and perswade to the diligent reading of them as may appeare by the places quoted in the margent And beside is most iniurious to the Scriptures themselues
must needs be a wil worship deuiâ—ed by their own braines and not warranted by the word of God which is also confessed by Eckius in his Enchiridion and insinuated by the Councill of Trent when in setting downe that decree it alleageth no Scripture but onely the ancient custome of their Church consent of Fathers and decrees of Councels 45. But to the poynt I say that seeing by the rule of Gods word we find but two kinds of worship one religious and diuine contained in the first Table the other ciuill and humane inioyned in the second If therefore the worship of Saints be not a meere ciuill worship belonging to the second Table of the Law then it must needes be religious and pertaine to the fiâ—st and so consequently Idolatrous This twofold worship and no more is approued by Saint Augustine who by that distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 putteth difference betwixt the worship that must bee giuen to God and that ciuill honour which is due vnto men for by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee meaâ—eth that kind of worship and honour which wee may and must performe to those that excell either in place of authority or in gifts and graces of God which is meerely humane and ciuill and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that dâ—uine worship which the creature oweth vnto the Creatour onely and that former is that which he alloweth onely to the Saints and that in that acception of the word which is before specified to wit as it is a ciuill and humane worship as appeareth more euidently by that which he affirmeth in another place in these words Colimus Martyres eo cultu dilectionis societatis quo in hac vita coluntur Sancti Dei homines sed illos tanto deuotiùs quantò securiùs post incerta omnia superata In which words it is plaine that the kinde of the worship exhibited to Saints triumphant and Saints militant is all one but the extension of it is greater to the one then the other according to tâ—e proportiâ—n of gifts and graces more apparent in one then the other 46. But the Romish Doctours and principally the Iesuites adde a third kinde of worship yea a fourth to these two albeit therein they neither agree with themselues nor with their fellowes as it commonly falleth out when men build vpon their owne fancies a rotten foundation and not vpon the word of God which is the ground of truth For Bellarmine saith that there is a ciuill worship due vnto men for some ciuill respect and there is a religious worship due vnto Saints in respect of their Sanctity and holinesse which he calleth dulia and a diuine worship proper onely vnto God which he calleth latria and that middle hee subdiuideth into two degrees the first he saith is dulia propriè dicta so properly called which agreeth to the Saints and the second Hyperdulia which belongeth onely to the humanity of Christ and the blessed Virgin his Mother and so hee maketh foure distinct kinds of worship whereof two are without the compasse and reach of Gods Commandements and therefore I know not where to place them except in the diuels The like doctrine is deliuered by Vasques another Iesuite and Canisius and almost all the rest of that Iesuiticall raâ—ble but marke their harmony Bellarmine saith that this worship oâ— Saints is Cultus and therefore an acte of Religion though in a secondary respect Vasques denyeth it flatly to be an act of Religion at all but of sâ—me other vertue Thomas Aquinas Bonauenture Gabriel and Albertus are of mind as testifieth Vasques that it is one and the same kind of worship wherewith wee honour men aduanced in ciuill dignity and the Saints and that the difference is in the degrees of proportion not in diuersity of kind And in this they fully consent with vs as also with Saint Augustine and with the truth but this is contradicted by Bellarmine Vasques and all the rabble of the Iesuites as may appeare in the places before quoted 47. Paluda nus makes three kindes of Hyperdulia the first due to the humanity of Christ for it selfe the second to the blessed Virgin the third to the rest of the Saints but as for dulia that he applyeth onely to that honour which we owe to all reasonable creatures except the damned but this is crossed by all the rest Againe Durandus as Vasques reporteth is of opinion that the worship of Saints departed and men in ciuill dignity proceedeth from one and the same vertue and differeth onely in the act applyed vnto the degrees of excellency But Bellarmine Vasques and all of that stampe renounce vtterly that opinion as I haue shewed Lastly Vasques that acute Iesuite as they brag of him affirmeth that the worship of Saints is not an act of Religion and yet in the same Chapter he calleth it cultus sacer religiosus A holy and religious worship then which what can be more contradictory for if it be a religious worship then must it needs be a worship of religion and an act of religion and if no worship of religion then no religious worship for coniugata by the rule of Logicke se inuicem ponunt tollunt And that which iâ— to bee noted aboue all the rest hee is constrained to deuise a new speciall habite of vertue to which this worship of Saints may be referred neuer heard of before neither in Morall Philosophy nor yet in diuinity and that without name and so without nature and being except in the Iesuites braine onely Thus wee may see how errour like Proteus turneth it selfe into many shapes and at last is strangled with it owne halter 48. But that this outward adoration of Saints departed is Idolatrous appeareth ouer and aboue that which hath beene said by these reasons first because they ascribe vnto them a presence not onely in one place but in all places where they are worshipped secondly a power of hearing seeing and helping and thirdly an ability of knowing and seeing the heart all which imply an infinite power and such as is properly diuine And therefore it is nothing but a vaine shift when they say they giue diuine worship to God and no more but a certaine kinde of seruice to the Saints when in truth they giue that which is Gods to the Saints besides touching kneeling and prostrating the body in a religious manner Peter refused to haue it done vnto him by Cornelius and the Angell rebuked Iohn twice for offering it vnto him if it had beene lawfull sure they would not haue refused it for neither did Cornelius take Peter to be a God but for a holy man nor Iohn the Angell for the Creator but for an excellent creature as euidently appeareth in the Texts and therefore they intended not to worship them as Gods yet because the manner of their worship was more then befitting a creature hauing in it a
of God A dead man cannot moue the members of the body nor vse the naturall saculties of the soule no more can the vnregenerate mooue one haire bredth to Heauen-ward nor vse any graces of the Spirit A dead man hath no sense nor feeling though hee bee neuer so sharply handled seeth not though the Sunne shineth neuer so bright heareth not though a trumpet be sounded in his eare no more can the vnregenerat feele the wounds of Gods Lawes heare the sound of the Gospell nor see the cleare light of truth that shinethround about him Lastly in a dead man there is a separation of the soule froÌ„ the body so in the vnregenerate there is a separation of Gods Spirit from the soule which is the soule of the soule For this cause S. Aug. likened the vnregenerate man to the Shunamites sonne beeing dead whom the Prophet Elizeus raised from death to life and others to Lazarus stinking in the graue or to the widowes sonne of Naiâ—â— lying dead vpon the beare or to Iairus daughter that was dead in the house noting three degrees of sinnes one more notorious then the other yet all in the state of death vntill Christ by his Spirit shall inspire life into them and this is the perfect analogy and proportion betwixt a dead man and a sinner and therefore Bellarmines exception is false that they doe not agree in all things for there is nothing wherein they doe agree not if the comparison bee rightly proportioned 82. Secondly if they did disagree in other things yet in this wherein lyeth the life of the similitude they must needs agree that as a dead man hath nothing whereby he can helpe himselfe for the recouery of his life so man spiritually dead hath nothing in him no faculty or power of the soule whereby he can any way further the obtaining of his coÌ„uersioÌ„ And this was Saint Augustines opinion agreeable to the Gospell for his words are plaine concerning Pauls conuersion that he was called from Heauen and by that mighty and effectuall calling conuerted Gratia Deisolaerat It was onely the grace of God And no otherwise did Iustine Martyr conceiue thereof when hee sayth That as to haue beeing at the first when wee are created was not of our selues so to choose and follow that which is pleasing to God is not by vs but by his perswading and mouing vs to the faith In this therefore which is the point of the question the similitude holds most strongly and so Bellarmines exception is nothing to the purpose 83. Thirdly and lastly it is most absurd of all which hee sayth that because a sinner liueth naturally therefore he moueth towards grace more then a dead carkas to nature which hath no life at all for in respect of grace it is all one to haue no life at all and to haue no life of the Spirit For nothing can worke aboue the compasse of it owne beeing Naturall life cannot tranicend the Spheare of nature nor any way moue to the Spheare of grace For as Plants that liue the vegetatiue life cannot arise to the sensitiue life which is in beasts nor they to the rationall which is in men So neither can these arise vp any whit to the life of the Spirit which is in Gods Saints till a new life bee inspired into them which new life as it is the conuersion of the soule to God so it is the foundation of all spirituall actions seeing life in euery kinde is the foundation of all the actions in that kind For vntill there bee life in a plant it doth not grow vntill it bee in a beast it doth not moue nor feele vntill in a man hee doth not thinke speake or remember and so vntill this life of the Spirit bee in the soule it cannot will nor worke any thing that is good Therefore I conclude that though a sinner liue naturally yet beeing dead to grace that that life doth no more helpe to his conuersion then the sensitiue life of a beast doth to the obtaining of reason or the vegetatiue life of a Plant to the obtaining of sense 84. The Gospell teacheth that all should read the Scriptures for so our Sauiour chargeth and his Apostles Paul and Peter and Iohn charge not Priests onely but all others And Abraham sendeth the rich Gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets And the Eunuch is not rebuked but approued by Philip for reading the Prophesie of Esay And the Bereans are commended for examining Pauls doctrine by the Scripture which should neuer haue beene if it had not beene lawfull for them to doe it This is the doctrine of the Gospell most plaine and euident But the Church of Rome teacheth that all men must not read the Scripture to wit Laymen except they bee permitted by their Ordinary because pearles are not to bee cast amongst swine nor a sword or a knife put into a childes hand nor occasion of errour offered to the ignorant nor matter of offence to the weake as also because they are more obscure then can bee vnderstood of the Laicks and common sort of people Thus they paint ouer the foule wrinkled face of Iezabel with false colours but yet the contrariety is plaine All ought to read the Scriptures and some ought not to read the Scriptures The one is the doctrine of Iesus Christ The other of the Pope and his Church 85. But Bellarmine distinguisheth two wayes First that there is a double way of knowing the Scriptures one by hearing and another by reading The first is commanded to all and therefore necessary to be vsed of all But this last is not commanded to any but to the Clergie and those whom they shall thinke fit to read them with profit and without danger But who seeth not that when our Sauiour willeth to search the Scriptures hee speaketh of reading And when the Bereans examined Pauls sermon by the Scriptures they did it by reading And when Abraham remitteth Diues brethren to Moses and the Prophets hee sendeth them to reading For Moses and the Prophets were dead in their persons and liued onely in their writings And lastly when the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the seuerall Churches they wrote them to this end that they might bee read of all For so Saint Paul chargeth the Colossians after they had read the Epistle that they themselues would cause it also to bee read in the Church of the Laodiceans Besides if it bee a dangerous thing for the ignorant to read the Scriptures for feare they should peruert the sense so fal into heresie or impiety then much more dangerous is the hearing of it seeing there is no preaching so pure as the word it selfe man euer mixing some dregs of his own corruption with the pure wine of the word nor any preacher so sincere but he doth often erre and so the hearer being debarred from trying his doctrine by the touchstone of the Scripture must needs irrecouerably fall into
and plain-dealing men The case then thus standing this practice of theirs cannot be termed Christian policy but plaine subtlety to giue it no worse a name 110. His last reason is drawne from the practice of the Church of God in all ages which hath alwaies forbidden the Bookes of Heretikes to be read and condemned them to the fire and to this purpose he produceth diuers fit and pertinent authorities to which I answere first that he fighteth herein without an aduersarie for we confesse that this was a necessarie and commendable practice to prohibit condemne burne and abolish all such Bookes as tend to the corrupting of the Christian faith and also to preuent them in the birth that they may not come to light but yet for all that this alloweth not their purging and paring of Bookes for they cannot giue vs one example in all antiquitie of this dealing except it bee drawne from Heretikes whose practice it hath beene to depraue the Scriptures themselues and the Decrees of Councels and the Bookes of ancient Fathers as witnesseth Bellarmine in many places of his workes and Sixtus Senensis and almost all other of their side III. Secondly the Fathers condemned onely the Bookes of Heretikes but our holy Inquisitors condemne not onely those whom they call Heretikes as Caluine Luther Beza Melancthon but mangle and purge the Fathers themselues and their owne deare children whom they dare not condemne for Heretikes as this Author himselfe confesleth those they chop and change wriâ—he and wring bend and bow as they list which is so much the more intolerable because being profest Romanists they durst not vary from the receiued opinions of the Church of Rome except mere conscience inwardly and some forcible reason outwardly mooued them thereunto 112. Thirdly and lastly the Fathers when they condemned any Heretike or hereticall Booke did it openly to the view of the World and not secretly in a corner not ascribing vnto them other opinions then they held eyther by adding vnto or detracting from their writings But our Romish correctors like Owles flye by moonshine and so closely câ—rtie their businesse that they would haue none to discry them yea they denie and abiure this trade I meane in respect of the Fathers and in a word they make almost all Authours to speake what they list for if any thing dislike them deleatur let it be wiped out or at least mutetur let it bee changed or addatur let something bee added vnto it that may change the sense and turne the sentence into a new mâ—ld of all these their Iudices Expurgatorij afford plentifull examples so that they can no wayes colour their forgerie and false dealing by the examples of the Fathers or Primitiue Church For this is a new tricke of legerdemaine of the Deuils owne inuention found out in this latter age of the World which hath beene verie fertile in strange deuices 113. Now then to conclude and to leaue this Priest with his vaine and idle reasons to be fuller confuted of him whom it more neerely concerneth and whose credit is touched by him Hence two necessarie conclusions doe arise one that they are guiltie of forgerie and corrupting of Authours by their owne confessions and secondly that they adde hereunto impudencie and shamelessenesse which is alwayes the marke of an Heretike and that first in defending their owne vniust and false dealing by reasons as if their wits were able to maintaine that snow was blacke and the Crow white and secondly in translating the crime from themselues vnto vs without all shew of reason not caring what they say so they say something for the honour of their mistresse the whore of Babylon and defence of her cause 114. Now then seeing it is manifest that they labour to vphold their Religion by these vniust vngodly and deuillish practices as treason crueltie periurie lying slandering and forging this conclusion must needes bee of necessarie consequence that therefore their Religion is not the truth of God nor their Church the true Church of God It is the iudgement of their owne learned Iesuites touching this last crime that wee may conuince them out of their owne mouthes that forging of false Treatises corrupting of true changing of Scriptures and altering of mens words contrarie to their meaning be certaine notes of heresie what can the Church of Rome be then lesse then hereticall that not onely doth all this but now at length professeth and maintaineth the doing thereof as lawful and profitable MOTIVE XIII That Religion the doctrines whereof are more safe both in respect Gods glorie mans saluation and Christian charitie is to bee preferred before that which is not so safe but dangerous But the doctrine of the Protestants Religion is more safe in all those respects and of the Papists more dangerous ergo that is to be preferred before this and consequently this to bee reiected THe first proposition is so euident and cleare that our aduersaries themselues will not deny it neither can it by any good reason bee excepted against for as it is in bodily physicke that medicine is alwayes preferred which bringeth with it lesse danger to the life of the patient and if it misse curing cannot kill so is it in the spirituall physicke of the soule which is Religion that doctrine deserueth best acceptance which is most safe and least dangerous for the soules health And as desperate medicines if they bee applyed by a skilfull Physicion argue a desperate case in the patient so desperate doctrines proue a desperate cause Neyther will any wayfaring man when two wayes are offered vnto him the one whereof is full of manifold perils and the end doubtfull the other safe from dangers and the end certainly good not choose rather the safer and certainer way and leaue the other so men like Pilgrimes trauelling towards the heauenly Canaan the way of Poperie on the one side and of Protestancie on the other being seâ— before them if they bee well in their wits will choose rather that way which is both the safer in the passage and the certainer in the end There is no doubt then in this first proposition and therefore let vs leaue it thus naked without further proofe and come to the second and examine whether our Religion or the Romish is the safer that all men may imbrace that which by euidence of demonstration shall appeare to be so and resuse the contrarie and here notwithstanding all the former pregnant arguments whereby the falsitie of their Church and Religion is plainly discouered wee put our selues againe vpon a lawfull tryall and referre our cause to the iudgement not of twelue men but of the whole world that if our euidence bee good wee may obtaine the day and the mouthes of our aduersaries may be stopped if not we may yeeld as conquered to bee led in triumph by them to Rome yea to the Popes owne palace to kisse his feet and receiue his marke on our
A RETRACTIVE FROM THE ROMISH RELIGION Contayning THIRTEENE FORCIBLE MOTIVES disswading from communion with the CHVRCH of ROME Wherein is demonstratiuely proued that the now Romish Religion so farre forth as it is Romish is not the true CATHOLIKE Religion of CHRIST but the seduction of ANTICHRIST By THO. BEARD Doctor in Diuinity and Preacher of Gods holy Word in the Towne of HVNTINGTON 2. Thess 2. 10. Because they receiued not the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God shall send them strong delusion to beleeue lies LONDON Printed by WILLIAM STANSBY and are to be sold by Henrie Fetherstone 1616. TO THE TRVELY VERTVOVS AND WORTHY KNIGHT SIR OLIVER CROMWEL T. B. wisheth encrease of grace and all happinesse SIR THERE bee many particular respects that mooue me to be bold to set your name in the frontispice of this work As first your sincere loue to true Religion and the Professors thereof Secondly your true detestation of the Romish Synagogue and the malignant influences of those wandring Planets that infect the aire of our Church and seeke by mining poysoning and other deuillish practices to turne our Jerusalem into Babel Thirdly for that your selfe with your religious Lady worthy children and brethren and great family haue beene a long time the principall auditors of my vnworthy ministery wherein many of these points haue been deliuered vpon occasion that you may see them here more fully discoursed and so be the better confirmed in the truth And lastly the particular obligations of loue and duty wherwith I am bound vnto you for many extraordinary fauours and kindnesses receiued These be the motiues that haue moued mee to select your selfe principally aboue all others to dedicate these motiues vnto For the which I desire no more patronage and protection then the truth of the seuerall points contayned therein doe deserue Let them stand vpon their owne legs or fall and perish I know they shall encounter with many bitter oppositions and sharpe aduersaries who will be ready to sift euery sentence and to find a knot in a bull-rush but my shelter is the buckler of truth and the brazen wal of a good conscience with which being armed I hope through Gods aide that I shall be as willing and able to entertayne the re-encounter if any assault be made as I was willing to giue this on-set I confesse that these are not the tithe of the arguments that might be produced against the Romish religion yet I doubt not but that euen these few may serue both to discouer the falshood thereof and to confirme and strengthen those that stagger and are weake in the truth the Lord accompanying these endeuours of his seruant with his blessing as I hope and pray that he would be pleased to do These motiues such as they are I willingly desire may be graced by your name hoping that your name shal no way be disgraced by them accept them therefore as tokens of my sincere loue to your selfe and zeale to the truth for which I desire no other requitall but an augmentation of your zeale to the same truth and a greater detestation of that Religion which already you abhor The Lord of his mercy encrease in you more and more all spirituall graces for your soules health and multiply his blessings temporall vpon your head and crowne you with glory and immortality eternall in the life to come Your worships most affectionate and deuoted THO. BEARD REVERENDIS DILECTISQVE IN CHRISTO FRATRIBVS Pijs ET FIDELIBVS Euangelij Ministris per omnem Britanniam constitutis gratia pax à DEO PATRE DOMINO nostro IESV CHRISTO NOn estis nescij fratres 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christo quanta nos Euangelij Ministros tùm verborum maledicentia tùm animorum odio insectentur Cleri Pontificij cohors colluuies vniuersa Sua in nos omnis generâ—â— tela quidem venenata confertim conijciunt famam nostram canino dente studio allatrant atque admordent quin ipsas adeo gulas nostras quidem eas nobis incisuri appâ—tunt si illorum in nos maleuolentiae par ad facinus potest as responderet nomen ipsum ministri perinde atque veteribus Iudaeis Samaritae illis itae putet foetet vt sine nausea indignatione illud ne nominare quidem possunt Huiuscemodi conuitijs contumelijs libricorum passim plaerique omnes referti onustique sunt Cuius si intestini inexplebilis odij rationes libeat perquirere quinque istas quas ordine percensebo praecâ—teris insigniores ex ijs principem hanc reperietis Quod Clerus hic Pontificius Monachorum cum primis fraterculorum locustae illae sunt in Apocalypsi commemoratae quae caudis similiter vt scorpiâ— cuâ—pidatis de infernalis putei fumo prodeuntes terminitam quinque mensium spatio homines excruciandi potestatem accepere Quâ— ex re fit vt vbi possunt quidem valent ibi ferro flammaque in nos grassentur vbi autem hoc illis non licet linguas calamos exacuant atque distringant consimili planè atque ille â—ngenio praediti de quo est apud Poetam Et si non aliquà nocuisset mortuus esset Haereticorum enim vt est scriptum ab Hieronymo hoc semper cacoâ—thes fuit vt conuicti de perfidia ad maledicta se conferant Sequitur hanc causam isthaec altera Quod luci cum tenebris nulla societas nullum commercium intercedat Ac nos quidem lucis Ministri sumus qui adomnes quibus non sponte oculi caecutiunt Euangelij claritatem quaqua versum diffundimus Illi contratenebrarum satellites sunt qui dum scripturarum lectione plarosque arcent prohibent dum fidem quam vocant implicitam nos Carbonariam tanquam apprimè salutarem maximeque necessariam praedicant commendant densissimis sane crassissimisque tenebris hominum animâ—â— circumfundunt Istis porro causis annumeranda est haec tertia quod nullum tam capitale odium solet esse atque quod religionis causa suscipitur tum nos religionis illiâ—â— praecones sumâ—â— quae illorum superstitioni vsque adeo aduersa est nulla vt ratione conuenire nalla conciliari arte inter sepossunt Ex quo id existit quod nec Turcas quidem Iudâ—â—s nec ipsos adeo Ethnicos quamuis Christiani nominis hostes infestissimos pariter vt Protestantes Euangelij Ministros detestentur Cuires indicio est illa quam Hispanicam appellant inquisitio testis etiam locuples Româ— ipsa in qua sub ipsius sane ore Pontificis Turcis Iudaeis tuta consuetudo atque periculo omni libera immunis negotiatio est siquem autem nostrae religionis vel leuissimè suspectum esse contingat â—um vel aperta vi vel occultis insiaijs ad internecionem vsque persequuntur Quid autem causae est quaeso quod tanta in nos solos immanitate furoreque
vero audent cum infimus poene ex nostris vnus comminus cum ijs manus conserere in arenam prouocare non reformidat vnde quid gregum ductores efficere possunt si annitantur par est illos reputare partim etiam quod Pontificiorum suae persuadendo religioni quamplurimos strenuam operam nauasse video Euangelicorum autem qui hoc idem scriptionis genus per certa argumentorum motuumve capita sunt sequuti paucissimos sane recordor ne dicam nulios Vestram igitur in tutelam fratres meas hasce ratiunculas accipite aequis animis atque oculis legite discutite Censuram vestram non recuso dum preces modo vestras amorem mihi non denegetis Hic Romanae religionis septem sacramenta Turpitudinem Impietatem Falsitatem Nouitatem Idololatriam Scripturarum vituperationem Ignorantiae defensionem licet contueri de quibus princeps Impuritas sequentium in rationum prima secunda in tertia autem quarta duodecima Impietas aperietur Nouitas quam nobis obiectant in eos ipsos totam per vndecimam regeretur Falsitas in octaua nona dilucebit Idolorum cultus in septima Scripturarum contemptio simul Ignorantiae defensio in quinta sexta decima patefient Frement frendebunt sat scio Iesuitae caeterique sacrificuli ac omissis forte rationum ipsarum ponderibus momentis hinc atque illinc vt eorum moris est aliquidpiam excerpent quod obtrectent arrodant sed ringantur per me quidem rumpantur invidia nihili illorum siue calumnias moror siue maledicta dum vos modo propitios mihi habeam quorum inprimis vereor reuereor iudicium Quos propterea oro obtestor vt siqua in re de veritatis scopo deflexerim comiter in viam me reducatis si minus ac debui fortiter prudenter hac in arena demicârim imbecillitati id meae condonetis praeuaricationi nequaquam tribuatis Ego certe hoc quantillumcunque est Deo nostro minime displiciturum confido quippe non ignarus seruulum qui duobus extalentis rem fecit Domino suo aeque ac illum alterum acceptum probatumque extitisse qui decem ex quinque lucrifecit Interim fratres mutui amoris vinculo nos inter nos complectamur vt quemadmodum contra sponsam Christi aduersarij nostri vt olim Pilatus Herodes contra Christum ipsum coniunctissimè conspirant consentiunt Sic nos pari voluntatum consensu eademque aut etiam maiore animorum conspiratione aduersus Antichristum illiusque astipulatorum â—ssectatorum omnium vires depugnemus Quod eò vt fortius foeliciusque fiat facessant à nobis precor derebus minutulis lites omnes discordiae quibus nimio plus iam diu assueuimus Reprimamus nunc demum ipsinos ne quam de sui temporis quibusdam Iraeneus habuit querimoniam quod proptermodicas quaslibet causas magnum gloriosum Christi corpus conscinderent quam etiam de suae aetatis consimilibus alijs Nazianzenus quod essent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eadem de nobis ni prouidemus iusta querela esse possit Quin Apostoli illud ad Corinthios de re exgenere indifferentium disserentis potius meminerimus Siquis videtur contentiosus esse nos eiusmodi consuetudinem non habemus neque Ecclesia Dei eiusdem aliud ad Galatas Si alij alios mordetis deuoratis videte ne vicissim alij ab alijs consumamini Deus pacis lucis ab Antichristi illiusque gregalium impetu insidijs vos omnes protegat defendat ac coelestem suam ad ciuitatem nouam Hierosolymam sartos tectos tandem perducat T. B Motiue I. THat Religion which in many points giueth liberty to sinne is not the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue II. That Religion which maintaynes by the grounds thereof things forbidden by all lawes both of God of Nature and of Man cannot be the true Religion bat such is the Religion of the Romane Church ergo Motiue III. That Religion which imitateth the Iewes in those things wherein ther are enemies to Christ cannot be the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. Motiue IIII. That Religion which derogâ—teth from the glory of God in the worke of our Redemption and giueth part thereof vnto man cannot be the truth of God but such is the Popish Religion ergo Motiue V. That Religion deserueth to bee suspected which refuseth to bee tâ—yâ—d by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will be iudged â—ryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo Motiue VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to be suspected which doth purâ—oâ—â—ly disgrace the sacred Scriâ—tures But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome â—â—go Motiue VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintayneth commandeth and practiseth grosse anâ— palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome â—rgo c. Motiue VIII That Religion which implyeth manifold contradiction in it selfe and is contrary to it selfe in many things cannot bee the true Religion but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue IX That Religion whâ—se doctrines are in many points apparently opposite to the word of God and tâ—e doctrine of the Gospell cannot be the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. Motiue X. That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse ignorance amongst the people and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian saith cannot be the truth but this doth the Romish Religion ergo c. Motiue XI That Religion which was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the primitiue Church cannot â—e the truth but such is the Romish Religion in most points thereof therefore that cannot be the truth Motiue XII That Church which maintayneth it selfe and the Religion professed by it and seeketh to dâ—saduantage the Aduersaries by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes cannot bee the true Church of God nor that Religion the truth of God by the grounds whereof they are warranted to act such deuillish practices but such is the practice of the Romish Church and therfore neither their Church nor their Religion can be of God Motiue XIII That Religion the doctrines whereof are more safe both in respect Gods glory Mans saluation and Christian charity is to be preferred before that which is not so safe but dangerous But the doctrine of the Protestants Religion is more safe in all those respects and of the Papists more dangerous ergo that is to be preferred before this and consequently this to be reiected THIRTEENE FORCIBLE MOTIVES DISSWADING FROM COMMVNION With the Church of ROME Whereby is demonstratiuely prooued that the now Romish Religion so farre forth as
it is Romish is not the true Catholique Religion of CHRIST but the seduction of Antichrist THE PREAMBLE THat which Ireneus an ancient and godly Father of the Church speaketh of all Heretickes that all the Helleborus in the world is not sufficient to purge them that they may vomit out their follie may truely be spoken of the Church of Rome and her adherents that it is a difficult matter if not almost impossible to reclaime her from her errors and to heale her wounds All the balme of Gilead will not do it nor all the spirituall phisicke that can be ministred for there are two sinnes which of all other are most hard to bee relinquished Whoredome and Drunkennesse the one because it is so familiar and naturall to the flesh the other because it breedeth by custome such an vnquenchable thirst in the stomacke as must euer anon be watered with both which spirituall diseases the Church of ROME is infected She is the Whore of Babylon with whome the Kings of the Earth haue committed fornication and who hath made drunke with the Wine of her fornications all the Inhabitants of the Earth In regard of the first Ieremie prophecied of her that though paines be taken to heale her yet shee could not be healed And in regard of the second Saint Paul prophecied that GOD would send them strong delusion that they should beleeue lies that all they might bee damned that receiued not the loue of the truth Notwithstanding though the hope bee as little of the reclaiming of most of them as of turning an Eunuch into a man or making a blacke Moore white yet I haue propounded in this discourse a strong potion compounded of ingredients which if they bee not past cure may purge and cleanse them of their disease and reduce them to the sanity of Christian Religion Which if their queasie stomackes shall eyther refuse to take or hauing taken shall vomit vp againe and not suffer them to worke vpon their consciences yet this benefit will arise that God shall be glorified the truth manifested and all that loue the truth confirmed and they also themselues that are so drowned in error that they will rather pull in others ouer head and eares vnto them and so drowne together then be drawne out of the myre by any helpe shall be conuinced in their consciences of their most grosse apostacie With this confidence towards Gods glorie and the good of his Church though with little hope of recouering them from their obdurate blindnesse I enter into my intended taske desiring the Lord to giue a blessing to these poore labours which I consecrate to my Lord and Master Iesus Christ whom I serue and the Church his Spouse of which I professe my selfe to bee one of the meanest members MOTIVE I. That Religion which in many points giueth libertie to sinne is not the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of ROME ergo c. THe first proposition is an vndoubted truth and needs no confirmation especially seeing S. Iames describeth true Religion by these attributes pure and vndefiled And S. Paul calleth it the mysterie of godlinesse and the doctrine according to godlinesse And herein consisteth an essentiall difference betwixt the true Religion and all false ones so that it must needs follow that that Religion which is essentially the cause and occasion of sinne and openeth a wide window to vngodlinesse cannot be the truth of God but must needs fetch it beginning from the deuill who is the author of all euill The Gospell indeede may by accident be the occasion of euill as S. Paul saith The law is the occasion of sinne for it stirs vp contention and strife and discouers the corruptions of Mans heart and by opposing against them as a damme against a streame makes them to swell and boyle and burst forth beyond the bounds howbeit here the cause is not in the Gospell or Lawe but in the corruption of mans heart which the more it is stirred the more it rageth and striueth to shew it selfe But neuer yet was the doctrine of godlinesse the cause of wickednesse nor the pure and vndefiled Religion of Christ Iesus an essentiall procurer and prouoker vnto sinne 3. This therefore being thus manifest all the question and difficultie remaineth in the second proposition to wit that the Religion of the Romish Church is such as openeth a gappe vnto sinne and giueth notorious libertie and scope to vngodlinesse and that not by way of accident or occasion but necessarily as the cause to the effect Qua data necessariò soquitur effectus as the Logicians speake and therefore being an â—npure and defiled Religion and the mysterie of iniquitie not the mysterie of godlinesse it cannot be that true Religion which Christ our Sauiour brought with him from heauen and left here vpon earth blamelesse and vnspotted like himselfe to be the way to lead vs vnto heauen where hee is 4. That the Romish Religion is a polluted and defiled Religion tending to libertie and loosenesse Let the indifferent Reader iudge by these few instances deriued out of the verie bowels of their Church and being articles of their faith and grounds of their Religion And first to beginne with their doctrine of dispensations whereby they teach that the Pope hath power to dispense with the word of God and with euery commandement of the Law and not onely with the Law but with the Gospell and Epistles of Paul to what horrible loosenesse and lewdnesse of life doth it tend for to omit that it containeth in it open blasphemie by their owne rule which is that In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior the inferiour may not dispense with the precept of the superiour by which the Pope dispensing with Gods lawe is not oneâ—y equalled but exalted aboue God what sinne is there bee it neuer so hainous which there is not libertie giuen to commit by this licencious doctrine 5. Incest But Pope Martin the first gaue a dispensation to one to marrie his owne sister and not his wiues sister only as some of the Romish crue would dawbe ouer this filthie wall because it is in Antoninus Cum quadam eius germana for Siluester Prieriâ— Bartholomeus Fumus and Angelus de Clauafio speake more plainely Cumsua germana that is with his owne naturall sister Another Pope dispensed with Henry the eight to marrie his sister in law and with Philip of Spaine to marrie his owne Niece and Clement the 7. licenced Petrus Aluaradus the Spaniard to marrie two sisters at once and no maruaile seeing it is the very doctrine of the Romish Church that the Pope can dispense in all the degrees of Consanguinitie and Affinitie saue onely with the Father and his daughter and with the Mother and her Son Sodometrie But Pope Sixtus the fourth licensed the Cardinall of Saint Lucie and his familie to vse freely that sinne not to bee named in the
vncleannesse and some Angels of the bottomles pit by couetousnes and a little after Not a few of our moderne Priests doe serue the most vild and filthy God Priapus Panormitane a man of great fame in the Councell of Basill after he had shewen the vowe of continencie not to be of the essence of Priest-hood nor by the lawe of God but a constitution of the Church addeth these words I beleeue that it were a wholesome ordinance for the good saluation of soules to leaue it to mâ—ns owne wils to marrie or not because experience doth show that now a daies they doe not liue spiritually and vndefiledly but that they are defiled by vnlawfull copulation whereas they might liue chastly with their owne wiues 37. I could adde vnto these testimonies the report of Iohn Gerson touching his time who complained that some Cloysters of Nunnes were become Stewes of strumpets and whores And of Mantuan a Carmelite Italian Frier whose verses touching this poynt are sufficiently knowne Patrum vita fuit melior cum coniuge quà m nunc Nostra sit exclusis thalamis coniugis vsu The life of the Fathers was better being married then ours to whom marriage is forbidden and of Polidor Virgill who liued in King Henrie the Eights daies whose censure is this that this enforced chastity is so farre from excelling that marriage-chastity that no crime hath brought more shame to the order of Priesthood more euill to Religion nor more griefe to all good men then that blot of the filthinesse of Priests But that I feare I haue too much offeÌ„ded chaste eares already with raking into this dunghill I conclude with the report of Martin Luther he saith that he saw Cardinals at Rome which were accounted holy for no other cause but that they were content onely to commit fornication and adultery with women and did not giue themselues to other vnnaturall lusts Thus as it were in a mappe I haue described the filthy and abominable fruites that proceed from that Romish doctrine of vowed chastitie Is it possible that the spring should be good when the streams are thus corrupt 38. The fift doctrine of Poperie giuing manifest occasion of liberty to the professours thereof is their doctrine of veniall sinnes By which they teach that many acts which are transgressions of the laws of God men yet are not properly sins nor deserue the wrath of God but of their nature are pardonable and therfore he which committeth any such doth neither offer iniury to God nor breake charity in respect of his neighbour and so deserues not hell nor is bound to be sorry for them but that the knocking of the brest going to Church being sprinckled with holy water or the Bishops blessing or crossing ones selfe or doing any worke of charity though we neuer thinke actually of them is a sufficient satisfaction for them This is the doctrine not onely of the Schoolemen but also of the finest and refyning Iesuites euen of Bellarmine himselfe who thus distinguisheth veniall sinnes that some are veniall of their own nature and kind to wit such as haue for their obiect an euill and inordinate matter but which is not repugnant to the law of God and of our neighbour others are veniall by the imperfection of the worke which imperfection ariseth partly ex surreptione that is by vnaduised falling into them without full consent of will and partly ex paruitate materiae by the smalnesse of the matter which is committed as if a man should steale a halfe-peny or some such trifle This is the Cardinals doctrine which as neere as I could I hauâ— word for word set downe And that wee may more fully vnderstand their meaning they affirme in very deede that they are no sinnes but aequiuoce that is so called but not â—o in truth for the word peccatum sinne doth not vniuoce aâ—â—ee 〈…〉 eniall sinnes as it doth to mortall and therefore it is their generall opinion that they are not against but beside the lawe that is in plaine words not sinne for euery sinne is a transgression of the law Now let the Readeriudge whether our doctrine that all sinnes of their owne nature are mortall and deserue condemnation except they be repeÌ„ted of or heirs that some are veniall and binde not the offender to condemnation doe more tend to liberty whether we restraine more the people from sinning that thus say vnto them All your sinnes though neuer so small are of their owne nature damnable except by faith in the bloud of Christ they be purged away and by repentance which is a fruite of faith sorrowed for and laboured against or they that say thus to them A number of your ordinarie sinnes are not damnable you neede not faith in Christs bloud to purge them nor repentance to bewaile them nor care and endeuour to preuent them who seeth not that our doctrine pulleth in and theirs letteth out the reynes of libertie to our corrupt nature for when a man beleeueth that he may do many things which are in deed transgressions of Gods lawe without offence to God or hurt to his neighbour or wounding of his owne conscience and that after he hath committed them he needeth not greatly to repent of them or to be sorry for them but that they are done away by saying a Lords prayer or hearing a Masse or creeping to a Crosse or receiuing a little Holy water what neede he make any conscience of these so sleight trifles nay how can hee choose but neglect and make light account of them This is one of the deuils subtile deuices or iuggling trickes which Saint Paul speaketh of where with hee laboureth to seduce simple soules for either hee will aggrauate our sinnes to driue vs to desperation or extenuate and excuse them to draw to presumption the rocke and gulfe whereat many thousand soules suffer shipwracke And this last the most dangerous wherein the Papists shew themselues the deuils agents and factours by this their doctrine of veniall sinnes for what is this but to excuse sinne and to extenuate it and so to make men presume to commit those things which they esteeme of no greater moment 39. The truth of this will more clearely appeare if wee take a suruay a little of those particular sinnes which they account as veniall To sweare by the bloud of God or wounds or bodie of Christ is no blasphemie saith Cardinall Caietane if it be spoken in a brawle or in some perturbation of mind neither is it to be counted any more than a veniall sinne Againe formall cursing saith Gregorie de Valentia although in it owne kinde it be a mortall sinne yet it may be onely a veniall to wit in respect either of the smalnesse of the matter or the want of deliberation in the speaker and hereby saith he Parents cursing their children with bitter words and deuoting them to the deuill may often be excused from mortall sinne
cases cannot be cleared from Incest for this is the rule of supputation by the Canon law which is most fauourable to them Quo gradu remotior distat à communi stipite eodem etiam inter se distant In what degree the person furthâ—st remoued is distant from the stockâ— in the same degree they are distant from one another Now put the case after this manner ABRAHAM ISAAC IACOB IVDA PHARES ISCAH ISMAEL Here in this Scheme or figure Iscah is by their own rule in the first degree from ISMAEL and therefore by their doctrine ISMAEL may marry ISCAH which is most notable and apparent Incest for brethren and sisters are but one flesh and so Isaac and Ismael are both one flesh as Iudah said of Ioseph Frater noster est caro nostra est he is our brother and our flesh And therefore Ismael is vnto all Isaacs posterity as it were their Father and they vnto him in stead of Children and so by consequent cannot marrie not onely within the fourth degree but euen vnto the thousand degree if it were possiâ—le For Adam if hee were now aliue could not find a woman in the whole world to marry lawfully withall without committing Incest neither is this a conceit of our own deuising but the expresse rule of the word of God for Leuit. 18. 12. 13. wee are forbidden to vncouer the shame of our Fathers sister or of our Mothers sister but all our predecessours in the right line are our fathers and mothers though they he neuer so sarre remooued and therefore to marry with their brothers or sisters stands guilty of Incest by 〈…〉 law For which cause also Iustinian decreeth that Amitam licet adoptiuam c. It is not lawfull to marrie our Fathers adopted sister nor our Mothers adopted sister because they are held in place of Parents and the law in the Digests is plaine and pertinent Amitam quoque materteram item magnam amitam materter am magnam prohibemur vxorem ducere quamisis amita magna maâ—â—rter a magna quarto gradit sunt We are forbidden to warry our Auxt either by Father or Mothers side yea our great Aunt though she be in the fourth degree Thus by all â—awes the Popish doctrine that it is lawfull for any to marry beyond the fourth degree is a plaine maintenance and allowance of Incest 20. Againe who knoweth not but that theft is condemned by all lawes except it be by the lawes of Platoes imaginaries CoÌ„mon-wealth or the Anabaptistical positions of some later heretikes who would haue propriety of goods taken away and a communitie of all things brought vp but the Papists by their doctrine not onely tolerate some kind of theft but euen maintaine and allowe it as lawfull For thus writeth Maldonate a learned Iesuite and of great authoritie Poore men saith he doe not commit theft when being pressed with extreame necessity they take that which is another mans because marke his Anabaptisticall reason the thing at such a time is not properly another mans but common to the life of man being in danger c. And to prooue this hee abuseth an excellent sentence of Saint Ambrose who speaking of the communitie of charitie and not of propriety saith Esurientis pauis est quem â—â— retines nudorum vestimenâ—uÌ„ est quod â—â— recludis miserorum paecunia est quam tu in terram defodis It is the poores bread which thou retainest his garment which thou lockest vp and his money which thou hy dest in the ground But he speaketh as any man may see not to encourage the poore to lay hands vpon rich mens substance but to stirre vp the rich to the workes of charitie neither to excuse a poore man from theft if he steale from the rich but to accuse the rich of theft if out of his wealth he do not powre forth to the necessitie of the poore Neither is this the opinion of one Iesuite onely but it is backed and barred by the approbation of another of no meane credite For thus writeth Emanuel Sa in his Aphorisines Ego inquit c. I saith he am of the same mind with them which thinke that it is lawfull for a poore man priuily to purloine from a richman which is bound to helpe him and doth not Here be two brethren in euill concurring in the defence of one and the same sinne for if to steale be not an offence for a poore man why doth the law say in generall Thou shalt not steale Let them shew the exception and exemption of the poore from the law or let them confesse to their eternall shame that they are maintainers of those that breake Gods law Besides if as Saint Augustine and all other learned Diuines confesse it bee not lawfull to lye though it bee to the sauing of our liues then it must needs follow that it is not lawfull for a poore man to steale though it be for the sauing of his life for theft is a sinne that bringeth more damage with it then an officious lye can doe which is vttered not for hurt of another but for the preseruation of our selues 21. Besides these Cardinall Tollet another Iesuite a man of high dignity and authority in the Romane Church approueth by his verdict another kind of theft worse then those before specified for he alloweth in some cases the vse of false ballances and falsification of wares his words are these There is saith he a man that either by reason of vniust dealing of the Magistrate or the malice of the buiers conspiring together to pull downe the price or some other reasonable cause cannot sell his wine at a iust price when the case thus falleth out then may this man either lessâ—n his measure or mingle water with his wines and so sell it for pure wine and require the full price as if the measure were compleate prouided that he doe not lye which neuertheles if he doe it is no pernitious lye nor mortall nor binding to restitution In like manner it is lawfull to sell other silke in stead of Granado silke and Italian in stead of Greeke and so after the same proportion all other wares These bee the braue positions of that renowned Cardinall wherein how apparently hee doth contradict the written word of God let any indifferent vmpier iudge by comparing this his doctrine with these sentences of the Scripture here ensuing Diuers weights are an abomination to the Lord and deceitfull ballances are not good A true weight and a ballance are of the Lord and all the weights of the bagge are his worke Diuers weights and diuers measures both these are euen abomination to the Lord yee shall not doe vniustly in iudgement in line in weight or in measure yee shall haue iust ballances true weights a true Ephah and a true Hin I am the Lord your God c. Thou shalt not haue in thy bagge two manner of weights a great and
they deuide the word of God into verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written and vnwritten their vnwritten word is nothing but orall Traditions deliuered as they say by Christ himselfe to his Apostles alone and not to his common Disciples because it contayned the high mysteries of the Kingdome of God and by them conuayed to their successours Bishops and Elders of the Church Secondly they affirme also with them that these orall Traditions are of equall authority and necessity with the word written yea that the word written is of no authority at all quoadnos in respect of vs except it bee authorized by the tradition of the Church And thirdly they teach that the word written is imperfect vnlesse the vnwritten Cabala bee added vnto it and that not one alone but both together make a perfect rule both for faith and manners Doe they not now Iudaize in all these points Yes the Romish Apologers to proue their doctrine of traditions fetch an argument from the Iewes Cabala as may bee seene in a late tractate falsly called the Catholike Apologie which is so much the more strange because their own Sixtus Senensis professeth that the Iewish Thalmud is fraught with innumerable blasphemies against God and his Christ our Sauiour and impieties against the law of Moses besides other infinite fopperies Is not this then a good patterne for them to imitate and is it not a sound argument that is deduced from such premises Surely their traditions which they build all their superstition vpon thus symbolizing with the Iewish Cabala can be of no better credit then it is and what credit that hath not onely their Senensis before bâ—t Galatinus another stout champion of theirs acknowledgeth when he saith that it is mere madnesse to approue all their vnwritten traditions which they bragge to haue beene deliuered in mount Sinai and from thence orderly to haue descended to posterity Now that which he speaketh of the Iewes Cabala may as truly be affirmed of the Romish traditions let them therefore goe arme in arme together since they will needes haue it so â—â— ioynt enemies to Christian Religion 18. Againe the Iewes ascribe so much credit and faith to their Cachamim or illumined Doctors that whatsoeuer they teach be it right or wrong they must not enquire into the truth thereof but receiue it as an article of their Creed and build their faith and saluation thereupon Thus writeth one of their owne Rabbines to wit Rabbi Isaac that died in Portugall Anno 1493. Wee are bound saith he to giue no lesse credit to euery Rabbine in their sermons and mysticall or allegoricall explications then vnto the Law of Moses it selfe and if there be found in their words any thing hyperbolicall or contrary to nature and sence we must ascribe the fault thereof to our owne defectiue vnderstanding and not vnto their words And the same is the doctrine of their Thalmud Their speeches saith it are the speeches of the liuing God neither doth one word of theirs fall to the ground in vaine and therefore we are bound to beleeue all things whatsoeuer are written of them or in their name for it is the truth neither must any man laugh at them neither in his countenance nor in his heart for whosoeuer shall doe so shall not escape punishment and his punishment they say shall be this that he shall be tormented in hell in boyling excrements And in another Booke the Iewes are commanded to say Amen not onely to their Prayers but also to all their Sermons and alleÌ„goricall expositions Yea if two Rabbines contend and contradict each other yet they are bound to beleeue both of them because the words both of the one and the other are the words of the liuing God though they vnderstand not each other And in a word so great is their madnesse that they are not ashamed to say That the words of their Rabbines are more to be regarded then the words of Moses law and that if they teach that the right hand is the left and the left the right yet they are bound to beleeue them 19. And is not the Church of Rome paralell to them in this case I will not condemne them but let their owne words be their Iudges Thus write the Rhemists in their Annotations vpon Acts 17. 11. The hearers must not try and iudge whether their Teachers doctrine be true or no neither may they reiect that which they find not in Scripture The same is the tenent of Cardinall Hosius Andradius and all other of that stampe Bellarmine affirmeth that the people must beleeue what soeuer their Passors teach except they broach somenew doctrine which hath not beene heard of in the Church before and if they do so yet they must not Iudge of them but referre them to the definitiue sentence of the Pope to the which they must yeeld full consent without further examination Yea he impudently concludeth in another place That if their ordinary Pastor teach falshood another that is not their Pastor teach the contrary truth yet the people ought to follow their Pastor erring rather then the other telling the truth And another blasphemous Cardinall giueth a reason thereof Because saith he if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and man and the Pope thought the same hee should not be condeÌ„ned For saith a third Cardinal the iudgement of the Pope is the iudgement of God and his sentence the sentence of God As if the Iudgement and sentence of God could bee erronious which the first Cardinall supposeth concerning the Pope or as if the Popes sentence being erronious could be the sentence of God as the second affirmeth Obserue their blasphemous absurdities Siluester Prierias concludeth this poynt when hee sayth That whosoeuer resteth not on the doctrine of the Romane Church and Bishop of Rome as the infallible rule of God is an Heretike And the Canonists sticke not to say that the Pope is subiect to no law but that his iudgement is in stead of law and that his actions are not to bee enquired into neither may a man say vnto him though hee lead thousand soules into hell with him Sir why doe you thus and that it is not better then sacriledge to call in question the Popes fact or to iudge of his actions Thus an insallibility of iudgement and an impossibility of erring is ascribed vnto the Bishop of Rome so that whatsoeuer hee propoundeth bee it right or wrong must bee receiued vpon paine of damnation Neither is it ascribed onely vnto him the worlds high Priest but also to their Councills and inferiour Pastors animated by his spirit whose doctrine is to be heard and not examined as they teach And therefore it is esteemed a great sin amongst them for a man to make question of any doctrine brought vnto them by any Romish Iesuite Fryer or Priest
common receiued doctrine of the Church of Rome 8. Now out of all these their opinions three materiall obseruations doe arise first that that Helena of theirs the merit of congruity though in word it be reiected by some of the finer Iesuites yet in substance and in truth is still retayned for whereas the Schoolemen say grosly that a man by doing what he is able by the power of his nature doth of congruity merit effectuall grace the Councill of Trent and the later Diuines choose rather to say that hee doth dispose and prepare himselfe to grace which indeede is in effect all one for to merit grace and to dispose a mans selfe to grace is in diuersity of words but one and the same sense and this Bellarmine ingenuously confesseth when he saith that a man not yet reconciled may by the workes of penance obtaine and deserue ex congruo of congruity the grace of iustification Thus they say and vnsay what they list and gainesay each other and indeede are in such a labyrinth that they know not what to say Secondly that howsoeuer they magnifie the grace of God in word and affirme nothing more frequently then that without Gods grace preuenting assisting and following vs we can doe nothing yet in very deede they ascribe well-neere as much power to free-will as to the grace of God yea more for they make the efficacie of the first grace to depend vpon the free consent of our will and make it as it were the Porter to let in or shut out grace at it pleasure which is one of the most presumptuous conceits that euer was vttered by the mouth of man and full of blasphemy Thirdly and lastly that this first grace which they say doth work with free-will in the first act of our new birth and help assist it is not intrinsicall and inhabitant but barely outward prouocant In respect whereof Coster compareth grace to a staffe in a mans hand which at his owne will he either vseth for his helpe or throweth away and to a friend who finding a man in a deepe pit perswadeth him by diuers reasons to be willing to be pulled out And in expresse words the same Iesuite saith that this grace is onely the impulsion and motion of the holy Ghost being yet without and standing knocking at the doore of our heart not being as yet let in And Bellarmine auoucheth the same when hee saith that it is but onely a perswading which doth not determine the will but inclineth it in manner of a propounding obiect And thus vnder colour of the name of grace they insinuate into mens soules the poyson of their doctrine attributing in word all to grace when indeede they meane nothing lesse 9. These things being thus discouered let vs now come to see how by this doctrine the glory of God is defaced which that it may more clearely appeare two grounds are to be laid the first whereof is that God is so iealous of his glory that he cannot endure any copartner or sharer with him therein The second is that in cases where grace nature seeme to worke together the godliest course is to magnifie the grace of God and to debase the nature of man yea to ascribe all to grace and nothing to nature because this sauours of humility whereas the contrary hath a manifest taste of pride These grounds being setled in our mindes let vs come to the examination of their doctrine And I pray you touching the first ground doth not this doctrine of theirs make man to part stakes with God In his glory whereas our doctrine doth ascribe all the glory in solid and whole to God onely let any man iudge whether ascribe more glory vnto God wee that affirme that God is all in all to the effecting of our regeneration or they that say that our will doth cooperate with his grace or else it can doe nothing we that say that we are starke dead to Godward till God put life into vs by his spirit or they that say wee are but sicke and halfe dead and are but onely helped and assisted by his spirit wee that teach that a man can no more prepare himselfe to his owne iustification then a dead man to life or they that teach wee may by our naturall powers either merit of congruity or prepare our selues to our iustification Lastly wee that ascribe the whole worke of our saluation to God onely or they that attribute some part thereof to their owne free-will If this bee not to derogate from Gods glory what can be for apparently they share the great and glorious worke of our regeneration betwixt God and man grace and nature 10. Would it not thinke you be a great impeachment to Gods glory if in the worke of our creation any should teach that God alone did not create vs but that we our selues were coadiutors with him so in the worke of regeneration which is a second creation to attribute part to Gods spirit and part to free-will is it not a great blemish to the glory of God for either it must be said that God could not doe it of himselfe alone or that he would not If the first then they blaspheme in derogating from his power if the second then they dote in saying God is not willing to maintaine his owne glory or that he is willing to impart it vnto others contrary to his owne word and will reuealed in the Scripture which way so euer they turne themselues they fall into the pit of impiety and make themselues guilty of high treason against the diuine Maiestie 11. Againe when our Sauiour raised vp Lazarus from the graue where he lay stinking foure dayes if it bee true which some write that Lazarus life was stil remaining in him and that his soule and body was not parted and so our blessed Sauiour did but excite and stirre vp that life which was as it were asleepe and did not inspire into him a new life and couple together his soule and body againe being deuided is not the glory of this miracle mightily darkened and extenuated This is our very case wee say that a man is starke dead and buried in the graue of sinne and till a new life of grace be inspired into his soule he cannot moue the least haires bredth to heauen-ward our aduersaries say that he is not dead but maymed and wounded like the man that betwixt Iericho and Ierusalem fell among theeues and therefore needes not to be reuiued but onely to be healed and helped with the oyle and wine of grace powred into his wounds he himselfe cooperating with his owne free will who seeth not that by this doctrine of ours God is more glorified and by theirs more debased for the lesse and easier the worke is the lesse is also the glory of the worke-man and the greater and harder the worke the greater his glory but it is a lesse worke to heale a man wounded then to raise a man
should apply another to the patient It is the hand that applieth the medicine and not another medicine so it is faith that applieth Christs satisfaction vnto our sinnes and not our satisfaction Nay except the merits of Christ be applied to our best works and sufferings they cannot stand before Gods iustice neither can they be meritorious as they themselues confesse so that it will follow by this doctrine that our satisfactions are both the hand to apply Christs and the thing to which it is applied All which is most repugnant not only to Religion but euen to reason it selfe 42. Lastly when as Bellarmine affirmeth that ad maiorem c. that is for the greater glory of God who is satisfied and the greater honour of man satisfying it pleased Christ to ioyne his satisfaction to ours He plainely discouereth the scope of their doctrine to bee the aduancement of the dignity of man whereunto indeede he ioyneth the glory of God for else all men would cry fie vpon such a Religion but yet it both detracteth greatly from the glory of God in ascribing some dignity vnto man and peruerteth the true end of the Gospel which is not the partial but the entire honor glory of God For as S. Paul saith Gods power is most clearly seene in our weaknes and his righteousnes in the confession of our shame his glory in our basenes and vilenes that no flesh might reioyce in his presence but that he onely might be exalted at that day But by this Romish doctrine euery iust maÌ„ may reioyce in his own dignity may lift vp himselfe in the presence of God as if he were the ioynt cause of his own saluation together with Christ and that Christs satisfaction had beene nothing auaileable to him except he had applied it to himselfe by his owne satisfaction 43. Thus they deuide saluation as it were party parpale betwixt Christ and man and paralell them together And whereas they say that we must be like vnto Christ as in meriting so in satisfying what doe they but intrude man into the fellowship of Christs office for our imitation of Christ standeth in a conformity to his conuersation and life and of those things onely which concerne his person and are imitable but not in being like vnto him in his office and therefore when they say that we must be like vnto Christ in satisfying they make euery man that is saued a Iesus and Sauiour to himselfe because they make him to imitate him in those things wherein consisteth his being our Christ Then which what can be more contrary to the honour of Christ 44. These bee the foure principall poynts whereby the glory of Gods mercy and Christs merits and the holy Ghosts grace is greatly defaced and in stead thereof mans nature and merits exalted Besides these there are diuers other doctrines of the Church of Rome which bring forth the same fruit some of which I will onely name and so conclude this thâ—â—â— argument And first by the doctrine of the Popes supremacie they detract from the power of Christ and consequently from his glory for both they endow the Pope with those titles which properly belong to Christ as to be the Father in Gods family the vniuersall Pastor the head of the Church the husband and bridegroome of it and all other names which are giuen to our Sauiour Christ in holy Scripture whereby it is shewne that he is aboue the Church and also they attribute the same power to the Pope which belongeth properly to Christ as to pardon sinne to dispense with the law of God to open and shut the gates of heauen not ministerially but absolutely and iudicially to depose Kings and to dispose of Kingdomes and such like Now what a dishonour is this to him in whose thigh is written this glorious title The King of Kings Hee must not be the onely head of the Church but the Pope must be a ioynt head with him nor hee the sole Gouernor but the Pope must be his Vicar nor the sole husband of the Church but the Pope in his absence must be her husband in his roome Could a mortall man endure this iniurie And doe wee thinke that the Sonne of God will beare it Either Christ is not able to gouerne alone or not willing they will not say not able lest their blasphemy should be too too odious and if they say not willing how can hee not be willing to maintaine his owne glory or not bee vnwilling to be confederated with a sinfull Pope for so often they are in the disposition of his Kingdome Let them make the best that they can of it yet it appeareth that Christs gouernment is diuided betwixt the Pope and him and so must the glory also needs be diuided 45. Secondly by their doctrine of the Inuocation and Intercession of Saints what doe they but diuide the office and so the glory of the Mediatour-ship betwixt Christ and them for they teach that Christ is our Mediatour of Redemption but the Saints Mediatours of Intercession whereas we with the Scripture make Christ Iesus to be the onely and sole Mediatour both of Redemption and Intercession Wee honour the Saints but wee pray vnto God alone in the name of his Sonne they adore the Saints and make their prayers vnto them as well as vnto God yea more prayers do they powre out by numbers vnto them then vnto God What is to dishonour God and Christ if this be not 46. Thirdly by their doctrine of traditions they derogate greatly from the glory of Gods mercy towards his Church for they hold that the written word is not sufficient for a Christian man to saluation without the helpe of Ecclesiasticall traditions whereby they plainely insinuate that either God had not that care of his family the Church as he might haue had seeing hee left not for it a perfect and certaine rule for the gouernment thereof but sent it ouer to vncertaine traditions or that wisedome which all Law-giuers labour to attaine vnto seeing hee could not at the first prouide for all future occasions or that loue that he would not one of these doth necessarily follow from their doctrine 47. Lastly by their doctrine of worshipping of Images whereby they giue vnto stockes and stones part of that religious worship which is due vnto God We teach that all religious worship is due vnto God alone They on the contrary maintaine that latria that is diuine worship is Gods due but dulia that is seruice is to be giuen to Images Yea that the Crucifixe is to be worshipped with diuine worship which is due onely to God Who seeth not what manifest iniury they offer to Gods glory by this superstitious worship of dumbe and dead Images 48. And thus omitting many other like poynts which might be inserted in this place I hope that the Minor proposition is sufficiently demonstrated that the Church of Rome doth by many doctrines derogate from the
c. Which words they interpret as spoken to Peter onely and consequently to the Pope his successour we to the rest of the Apostles as well as to him Where now doth the Scripture decide this doubt and speake plainely which is the truest sense Mary first in the very place it selfe by the due examination of the circumstances thereof they euidently shew that our sense is the truest for whereas the question is propounded to all the Apostles verse 15. and all the Apostles held the same faith that Iesus is the Sonne of God verse 20. it must needes be that Peter was but as the fore-man of the Quest and answered not for himselfe only but for them all thereby shewing forth not any preeminence of authority aboue the rest but a greater zeale and forwardnesse then the rest And herevpon it followeth that seeing this promise of the keyes is made because of that faith and confession therefore they all beleeuing and confessing the same haue an interest to the promise as well as Peter And this Anselmus in plaine tearmes affirmeth It is to be noted saith he that this power was not giuen alone to Peter but as Peter answered one for all so in Peter hee gaue this power to all 14. Secondly by the conference of another place which is more plaine to wit Ioh. 20. 23. where is a gift and an endowment of that power of the keyes which before was promised for to binde and to loose and to remit and retayne sinnes is all one in effect as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth and containâ— the whole vertue of the keyes now here they are all inuested with equall iurisdiction the Holy Ghost is equally breathed vpon them all and equall authority be queathed vnto them all by these words of the Commission As my Father sent me so I send you which exposition is confirmed by the authority of most of the Fathers as Augustine Cyprian Hierome Theophilact Anselme c. and thus the Scripture by a most liuely voyce determineth this doubt and as of this so of all other questions and interpretations the Scripture onely must bee the Iudge which by searching the originals examination of circumstances conference of other places and consulting with the learned Fathers and Expoâ—itors together with feruent prayer to God for inward illumination will giue a most exact and precise satisfaction to all controuersies touching matters of â—aith necessarie to bee beleeued 15. To the third reason that the Scripture is the law and therefore cannot be the Iudge I answere that though the Law and the Iudge be diuers distinct things yet they are subordinate one vnto the other and so may both ioyne in the concurrence of one cause as when our Sauiour saith Call no man Father vpon earth for there is but one your Father which is in heauen his meaning is not to exclude earthly Fathers from their title but to shew that God is the primer and principall Father both in respect of time order and cause and that the other are but subordinate vnto him so in a Common-wealth the Iudge is subordinate vnto the law and the law is the Iudges Iudge and for that cause as the Law is said to be a dumbe Magistrate so the Magistrate is said to be a speaking Law and so in truth the Law is the Iudge primarily and principally and the Magistrate is but the Minister of the law and the Iudge subordinate Now if this be so in a Common-wealth gouerned by humane Lawes which are failing and imperfect in many things being the ordinances of erring men how much more may we deeme it to be so in the Church of God whose Law-giuer is God himselfe and the law the word of God and therefore though the Pastors and Ministers of the Church may interpret the Scriptures yet they must be tyed to this rule to doe it by the Scriptures and to expound the law by the law for shall not a temporall Iudge giue sentence out of his owne braine but secundum leges statuta according to the lawes and statutes of the Realme And shall any Pastour of the Church be it the Pope himselfe giue iudgement in any question out of his owne brest without the direction of Gods word This is to preferre humane lawes before Gods law and to make the state of the Church farre inferiour to the state politike and to haue a more certaine rule for the deciding of ciuill controuersies then for the determining of questions of â—aith so that in a word the Scripture is both the law and the interpreter of the Law the Iudge and the Iudgement 16. Secondly Bellarmine affirmeth and laboureth to proue that the proper and chiefe end of the Scripture was not to be the rule of faith but that it might be commonitorium quoddam vtile A certaine profitable commonitory whereby the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might be conserued and nourished And to this end and purpose he vseth diuers reasons as first because it containes in it many things which are not necessary to faith as all the Histories of the Olde Testament and many of the New and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles all which were not therefore committed to writing because they were necessary to be beleeued but are therefore necessarily beleeued because they are written Secondly because all things necessary to be beleeued are not contained in the Scripture as by what meanes women vnder the law were clensed from originall sinne wanting circumcision and children that dyed before the eight day and many Gentiles that were saued againe which are the books of Canonicall Scripture and that these are Canonicall and those are not that the Virgin Marie was a perpetuall virgin that the Passeouer is to be kept vpon the Sunday being the Lords day and that children of beleeuing Parents are to bee baptized and such like Thirdly because the Scripture is not one continued body as a rule should bee but containeth diuers workes Histories Sermons Prophecies Verses and Epistles These be his three reasons by which the Iesuite would euince that the Scripture is not giuen to this end to be the rule of faith 17. To all which I will answere briefly and distinctly and first in generall secondly in particular In generall if the Scripture be not giuen to be the rule of faith why is it called Canonicall It is therefore called Canonicall because it containes the Canon that is the rule of faith and life this very inscription approued by all doth refute Bellarmines fond cauillation Againe if the Scripture was not giuen to bee the rule but onely a monitorie why were there so many Bookes written seeing fewer would haue serued for monition The multiplicity of Bookes proueth that they serue not onely to put vs in mind of our duty but also as an exact rule to square our faith and frame our life by And lastly if the Scripture was not giuen to be a rule why doth he himselfe
Asse and the holy Spirit lesse able to make that speake then an Angell was to make an Asse to speake Then which what could be brayed out more like the beast he speaketh of 26. But some may say All these are but priuate mens opinions we heare not all this while the determination of the Church Let vs harken therefore to the voyce of the Church touching this poynt that is as they hold of the Councill or rather Conuenticle of Romish Bishops assembled together at Trent which they call the Church representatiue The second Canon of the second decree in thy fourth Session of that Councill doth thus determine Let no man trusting to his owne wisedome dare to interpret the Scripture after his owne priuate sense or contrary to that sense which our holy Mother the Church holdeth or contrary to the vnanimous consent of the Fathers The former part of this Canon is good and sound for Saint Peter saith that no Scripture is of priuate interpretation and therefore they which wrest the Scriptures to their owne senses contrary to the intent and scope of them are guilty of a grieuous sinne before God and doe it to their owne destruction for Optimus scripturae lector est qui dictorum intellectum non attulerit sed retulerit exscriptura saith Hil. that is He is the best reader of the Scripture which doth not bring a sense to the Scripture but draweth it out of the Scripture Besides the middle and end of the Canon is not to bee misliked if they haue a fauourable interpretation for the iudgement of the Fathers is greatly to be regarded and the authority of the Church is to be held in especiall reuerence but for all this latet anguis in herba vnder these faire pretences of words is couched a snake of foule errour for first they tye the gift of interpretation of Scripture and of decision of controuersies to the Chaire of Peter seated at Rome and possessed by the Pope Peters successour as they call him or to the Chaire of Bishops assembled together in a Councill as in Noahs Arke whereas Saint Paul saith plainely speaking of the gift of interpretation These things workethone and the same Spirit distributing to euery man seuerally as he will And in another place that the spirituall man discerneth all things and therefore the Scriptures Now by the spirituall man the Apostle meaneth the man regenerate and sanctified by the Spirit as it appeareth by that he opposeth him to the naturall man in the verse going before and so the gift of discerning and interpreting is not proper to the Chaire of Bishops 27. Secondly this Canon doth not onely giue vnto the Church thus conceiued of them the onely gift of interpretation but also a Praetorian and vnexaminable authority in interpreting so that all which they deliuer out of their Chaires must bee receiued peremptorily without examining the grounds and reasons for which they are mooued to be of that iudgement which Tyrannicall vsurpation is both contrary to the expresse precepts and principles of holy Scripture and also to the doctrine and practice of all the ancient Fathers for the scripture bids to try all things to hold that which is good And Paul refused not to haue his doctrine examined of the men of Berâ—a by the Scripture the same Apost directeth vs how to behaue our selues at the time of prophecying namely that two or three Prophets speake the other iudge All which places are flatopposite to that peremptory obtruding of interpretations vpon the Church which the Canon speaketh of so are all the Fathers in generall for in prescribing certaine rules to all men both of vnderstanding and interpreting the Scriptures they plainely shew that there is not this absolute authority nor infallibility in any to obtrude what interpretation soeuer without contradiction or examination 28. Lastly the Canon in giuing this indefinite power of interpretation and determination of doubts to the Church without any relation had to the Scripture doth vtterly iustle out the Scripture from being the Iudge And so Andradius the interpretour of this Councill doth expound the intendment thereof when he saith that the iudgement of the Church is Principium vltra quod non sit fas in inquisitione progredi Aprinciple beyond the which it is not lawfull to proceede in inquisition By which he giueth to vnderstand that our faith must relye wholly and solely vpon the iudgement of the Church that is the Pope and his Prelates without enquirie at all into the word of God whether that which they propound be consonant to the truth or no. As Erasmus in a certaine disputation against the Papists confesseth that their opinion hath not sure certain testimonies of Scripture but that the contrary opinion may be better more clerely strongly proued out of Gods word notwithstanding saith he if the Church bid I will beleeue it for I will captiuate my vnderstanding to the obedience of the Church And this indeed is the Babylonian seruitude of the church of Rome wherby they fetter the souls of their followers to perpetual slauery and lead theÌ„ blindfold vnder the veile of an implicite faith vnto perdition for this is the first ground they lay in the hearts of all their generation that they must not examine the doctrine of the Church but take it at their hands as good coyne though it be neuer so counterfeit doctrina in Concilijs definit a custodieÌ„da est non examinanda saith Bellarmine that doctrine which is defined in a Council is to be kept not examined and ordinarius pastor Ecclesiae audiendus est non iudicandus saith Stapleton an ordinary Pastor of the Church is to be heard not iudged thus we see that the Scripture is thrust cleane out of dores from hauing any right or title in the decision of questions of faith not onely by priuate men but euen by their Church it selfe 29. Now here two things are to be obserued of vs for the plainer enucleation and clearing of this poynt first that in making the Scripture Iudge we doe not exclude the Church nor any member of the Church from the office of iudging and discerning onely we place them in their due order and ranke for this is it we intend that the Scripture is the highest and most absolute Iudge from the sentence whereof there is no appeale to be made to any higher Court and that the iudgement determination of the Church or of any member therof is subordinate vnto that and to be ruled and guided by that and where it is agreeable vnto that there to be receiued where it swarueth from that to be reiected For as in the ciuill estate the Iudges deputed to that office haue no absolute authority in themselues but are subiect vnto the lawe and the Ministers thereof and therefore must not speake what they list but what the law directeth so in the state Ecclesiasticall they
for to restraine a common good to a particular vse is an open wrong to the good it selfe which the more common it is the better it is and the lesse common the lesse good for bonum est sui diffusiuum good inclineth naturally to spreade it selfe and therfore the restriction thereof is violence and force offered to the nature of it and truth cannot abide to bee imprisoned but loueth liberty This is true in all naturall good and true things but much more in this supernaturall good and truth which as Origenâ— well noteth was not written for a few as Platoes Bookes were but for the people and multitude yea for the veriest Ideots and women and children as the Fathers affirme 20. And yet these presumptuous Romanists forbid the reading of the Scripture among the people one of them affirming That it was the deuils inuention to permit the people to reade the Bible Another That he knew certaine men to be possessed of the deuill because being but Husband-men they were able to discourse of the Scriptures All teaching that it is the ground of Heresie and that Lay men are no better then Hogs and Dogs and therefore these precious pearles not to be committed vnto them and that the Scripture to a Lay man is as a sword in a mad mans or a knife in a Childes hand Thus they practise to imprison the Scriptures within the Priests cells or Monkes cloysters which were giuen by God to be the light of the world and yet which is to be noted in Queene Maries bloudy and blinde daies such as could dispend a certaine summe of mony by the yeare might reade the Bible without any speciall dispensation as if heresie builded her nest rather in the brest of the poore man then of the rich or as if the rich were lesse carnall then the poore and thus these saucy fellowes handle the sacred Scripture at their pleasure being rightly to be branded with the name of Heretikes whom Epiphanius generally calleth Lucifugae because they cannot abide the light of the Scriptures but fly from them as Owles and Bats from the light 21. Another practice of theirs is against the sense of the Scripture as the two former were against the letter that neither the body nor the soule thereof might be left vnuiolated and this is in respect of the learned to bar them vp from controuling their errours as the other were in respect of the simple to keepe them from once looking into them Their policy in this is to interdict all senses and expositions of the Scripture saue such as agree with the Church of Rome and are allowed by the Pope of Rome this is the interdiction of the Councill of â—rent and is grounded vpon a false interpretation of that article of our faith I beleeue the Catholike Church for as Stapleton saith The literall sense of that article is that thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth And Cardinall Hosius If any man haue the interpretation of the Church of Rome though he know not whether and how it agreeth with the words of the scripture notwithstanding he hath Ipsissimum verbum Dei Now by the Catholike Church they meane the Romane Church or rather the Romane Bishop as I haue shewed for as Siluester sayth The power of the Catholike Church remaineth onely in him And as Stapleton The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching and therfore one â—aith that the Pope may change â—he Gospell and giue to it according to place and time another sense Yea a blasphemous Cardiâ—all is bâ—ld to say That if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and Man and the Pâ—pe thought the same he should not be condemned This is a tricke pâ—ssing all other whereby they not onely make sure worke with the Scripture that it neuer doe them hurt but also fashion the sacred and diuine sense thereof vnto their fond and foolish fancies and make it speake not what the Holy Ghost intendeth but what they imagine Nay they are so impudent as to say That the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood the sense thereof being one while this and another while that according as it pleaseth the Church to change her iudgement Can there be a greater disgrace to the Scripture then this is 22. Adde to these yet another deuice which is far worse then all the rest that is a grosse and palpable wringing and wresting out of the holy Scripture a sense contrary to the true intendment of the place fitting it strangely to their own purpose This is a practice of theirs so coÌ„mon as that their Books swarme with nothing so much as such fond and foolish interpretations and so ridiculous withall that it would make euen Heraclitus himselfe to laugh if he were aliue I wil here report some few of these strange wrested Expositions that the Reader may haue a taste of them and so iudge of the whole caske 23. And to beginne at the beginning of the Bible Genes 1. 16. It is written God created two great Lights the greater to rule the day and the lesser to rule the night that is saith Innocentius the third one of their owne Popes And also Molina the Iesuite God ordained in the Firmament of the Catholike Church two dignities to wit the Pontificiall dignitie and the Regall But that to gouerne the day that is the Spiritualty and is the greater and this to rule the night that is the Carnalty and is the lesser so that how great difference is betwixt the Sunne and the Moone so great is there betwixt the Bishop of Rome and a King that is according to the Glosse vpon the same place seuen and fiftie times So in the 3. of Genesis whereas the words of the Text are plaine Hee shall breake thy head or tread vpon thy head which is the first and principall promise of the Messiah they contrary both to the Hebrew and Septuagint translate and expound it Ipsa She shall applying vnto the Virgin Mary that which properly belongeth vnto Christ euen the worke of our Redemption And this interpretation and translation of that place is approued by the Councill of Trent in approuing the vulgar Latine Bible for authenticall and by Bellarmine also who calleth it a great mysterie that in the Hebrew a verbe of the Masculine gender is ioyned with a Nowne of the foeminine to signifie that a woman should breake the serpents head but not by her selfe but by her sonne and is also so translated by our Doway Translatours in English 24. So againe that place in the Psalme Psal 91. 13. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and the Cockatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon Pope Alexander the third interpreted it of himselfe and the Emperour applying the promise made to Christ principally and in him to all the Elect vnto himselfe as Pope and
vnderstanding by the Aspe and Cockatrice Lyon and Dragon the Emperour Frederick vpon whose necke hee set his foote vsing those words and all other Kings and Emperours and to proue that he so vnderstood the place when as the Emperor disdayning this pride made answere Not to thee but to Peter the holy Father treading on his necke replied Et mihi Petro Both to mee and to Peter Which storie though it bee branded by Baronius with the marke of a fable yet it is auouched by a full Iurie of witnesses and especially two Gennadius the Patriarke of Constantinople and a Venetian Historian that liued about that time which last onely differeth in the Popes alledging of the Text for he makes the Pope to say not in the second person thou but ambulabo I will walke vpon the Lion and the Adder Againe they interpret that place of Esay 49. 23. They shall worship towards the face of the earth and licke the dust of thy feete as a Prophecie of the Popes sublimitie For saith Turrian the Iesuite Where is this verified but in the kissing of the feete of the Bishop of Rome and yet who knoweth not that this is nothing else but a manifest prediction of the glory of the Church and the conuersion and subiection of Kings and Princes to the Religion of Christ What a wresting of Scripture call you this Are not these strange interpretations 25. But yet heare them which are more strange and ridiculous In the 28. of Esay 16. verse wee read Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation This all know being taught by the interpretation of S. Peter 1. Pet. 2. 6. is to be vnderstood of Christ only and none other yet Bellarmine vnderstands by this tried precious corner stone not Christ but Peter that is as he saith Sedes Romana The Roman Sea Againe we read Iere. 26. 14. Behold I am in your hands doe with mee as you thinke good and right This Text Bonauenture alledgeth to proue that Christ is in the Priests hands at the Masse as a Prisoner not to bee let goe till he haue payd his ransome that is till he haue giuen remission of sinnes contrary to the manifest sense of the place Hosea 1. 11. We read that the children of Iudah and Israel shall be gathered together and appoint themselues one head answerable to that Ioh. 10. 16. There shall be one fold and one shepheard which places properly appertayning to Christ and his Church are ordinarily and blasphemously alledged to proue that the Pope is the head of the Church Againe Cant. 5. 11. His head is as fine gold And Cant. 7. 5. Thy head is like the mount Carmel One of which is the speech of the Church to Christ and the other of Christ to the Church but Bellarmine interprets the first to be spoken Christ and the second of the Pope These be his words The Bridegrome compareth the head of his Spouse to mount Carmel because though the Pope be a great mountaine yet he is nothing but earth that is a man and the Bride compareth the Bridegromes head to the best gold because the head of Christ is God 26. But let vs come a little to the new Testament are they any thing more shie and cautelous in this then in the olde Heare and then iudge Matth. 28. 18. our Sauiour saith to his Disciples All power is giuen vnto me in heauen and earth This in the booke of Ceremonies is expounded of the Pope and also by Stephen the Archbishop of Patauy in the Councill of Laterane Luc. 22. 38. the Apostles say vnto Christ Behold two swords and he answered It is sufficient By this place of Scripture Boniface the eighth challenged to himselfe both temporall and ecclesiasticall authority because Christ said two swords were sufficient and bade Peter not cast away one of them but put it vp into the sheath This exposition flat contrary to the meaning of the Text was not only deuised by a Pope but also approued by Bellarmine and Molina the Iesuite and Balbus with diuers others though I confesse reiected by Stella Maldonate and Arias Montanus But what are these to a Pope that cannot erre and to such an Emminent Cardinall as Bellarmine is So likewise they expound that Text Matth. 17. 24. Solue pro te me Pay for thee and me To signifie that Christs family hath two heads to wit Christ and Peter because they two onely payd and that Peter was chiefe ouer the rest of the Apostles because none of the rest payd as if paying of tribute was a signe of preeminence and not rather of subiection as Iansenius expounds it So Baronius alledgeth that of Act. 10. 13. Arise Peter kill and eate to proue the Popes power to excommunicate the Venetians Kill that is excommunicate and eate that is bring them to the obedience of the Church of Rome This is goodly stuffe indeede sure they stand in neede of arguments to proue their cause that are driuen to these silly shifts So our Country-man Fisher to proue iustification by workes alledgeth that Text of S. Peter 1. Pet. 4. 8. Loue couereth the multitude of sinnes which he expounds thus that loue expiateth and purgeth away the guilt of our sinnes in the sight of God contrary to the direct sense of the holy Ghost Pro. 10. 12. 27. It is a wonder to see how both Bellarmine and all the Patrones of Purgatory wring and wrest the Scripture to vnderprop the Popes Kitchin The Scripture cannot name fire and purging but presently there is Purgatory as Esay 4. 4. and 9. 18. Mal. 3. 3. nor a lake where there is no water but there is Purgatory as Zachar. 9. 11. nor things vnder the earth Phil. 2. 10. Apoc. 5. 3. but there is Purgatory and yet they themselues confesse that they know not whether it be vnder the earth or no because the Church hath not yet defined where it is And Bellarmine bringeth in eight diuers opinions touching the place of Purgatory but two of their expositions touching Purgatory I cannot ouerpasse left I should depriue the Reader of matter of laughter in the midst of this serious discourse and them of commendation of wit for they are witty aboue measure the one is Mar. 13. 34. where it is said in a Parable that a certaine man going into a strange Country leaueth his house and giueth authority to his seruants and commandeth the Porter to watch This man going into a strange Country signifieth the soule say they which by death departeth out of this world his leauing authority with his seruants signifieth that he commandeth his executors to procure with his goods the prayers suffrages of the Church whereby he may be freed from Purgatory hee commandeth the Porter to watch that is he giueth part of his goods to his Pastor that he may diligently
not onely the worshippers of Idols themselues but they that should entice or perswade any to Idolatry The execution of which Lawes wee see put in practice vpon the Israelites Gods owne people in the 32. of Exod. and 23. of Numbers Thirdly and lastly in respect of the nature of the sinne which is first a senslesse sinne full of folly contrary to the very light of reason and nature as both the Prophet Dauid and Esay at large proue And secondly a sinne full of impiety because they that worship an Idoll worship the Deuill as S. Paul affirmeth 1. Cor. 10. 20. And lastly a sinne most opposite to the glory of God and consequently sooner procuring the vengeance of God then any other for it is called in the Scripture spirituall fornâ—cation and adulterie because the Idolater forsaketh God and prostituteth himselfe to an Idoll and that in Gods presence And therefore as corporall fornication is the onely cause of diuorce betwixt man and wife so this sinne onely causeth God to diuorce himselfe from his Church and to take from her all her ornaments and Iewels that is his Word and Sacraments and to giue her ouer into the hands of her enemies Thus the greatnesse of this sinne of Idolatry is manifest and from thence I may conclude my first proposition that that Religion which maintayneth and commandeth this sinne so full of folly impiety and contrariety to God is worthy not onely to be suspected but euen abhorred and detested of all men 4. But let vs come to the examination of the second proposition to wit whether the Church of Rome bee guilty of this great sinne or no. The Romanists mainly denie it as they haue great reason for if their Religion bee proued to maintaine Idolatrie they know that it must needes fall to the ground and therefore they deuise all manner of shifts to deliuer themselues from this imputation But we on the other side confidently affirme it and that the world may see wee doe it not without great reason wee confirme our affirmation with this strong argument Whosoeuer ascribeth diuine honour to any creature is an Idolater but the Romanists ascribe diuine honour to many creatures therefore they are Idolaters and lest any should thinke this to bee the errour of priuate persons and not the heresie of their Religion I adde vnto the Minor that all the Romanists doe this from the very grounds of their faith and that in so doing they are warranted from their Religion it selfe 5. They deny both the Maior and Minor proposition in this argument and in denying them especially the Maior they giue iust cause of vehement suspition if not of plaine demonstration that they are guilty of the crime whereof wee accuse them for if a thiefe standing at the barre being accused of a robbery by the high way side should answere that to take money from a man by the high way side at Noone-day was not theft all men would thinke that hee was guilty of the robbery and so the Iurie would finde him then certainely the Romanists by denying this to be the true definition of Idolatry which is propounded in the first proposition bewray their owne guiltinesse and giue vs more cause to suspect them then we had before 6. But let vs heare their shifts they principally are two one of Bellarmine the other of Valentia two maine posts in the house of Popery Bellarmine would faine vndermine this proposition to giue to creatures diuine honour is Idolatry by a distinction betwixt an Idol and an Image affirming that an Image is the similitude of a thing that hath a true being but an Idol of a sained thing that indeed is not and therevpon he seemes to conclude that to ascribe diuine honour to some Images is not Idolatry because euery Image is not an Idoll In the proofe of this distinction he labours much and profits little for like the heedlesse fish hee leapes out of the Frying-pan into the fire and tyes the knot faster which he would seeme to vntie for first all the Idolatry of the Church of Rome consisteth not in worshipping of Images but in many other things as shall appeare in the Discourse following Secondly if to worship the Image of a true thing be not Idolatry then the Gentiles were not Idolaters in worshipping the Image of Iupiter and Mars and Diana and Romulus and Aesculapius and the Sunne because as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth all the Idols of the Gentiles were the statues of men And Saint Augustine also affirmeth That the Gentiles did worship those things which were in being but were not to bee worshipped and then the Israelites did not commit Idolatry in the Wildernesse when they adored the golden Calfe nor was that Calfe an Idoll contrary to the expresse Text of Scripture Acts 7. 41. because it was a representation of a true thing namely of the true Iehouah as it is euident Exodus 32. 5. Thirdly let it be graunted that an Idoll is onely the similitude of an imaginary and fained thing yet will not this acquite them of Idolatry seeing they worship in the Romish Church the Images of things which either neuer were or were not such as they are taken to bee as the Image of S. Katharine and Saint Christopher and Saint George and such others the truth whereof they are not able to proue by any approoued Historie Nay it is confessed that many are worshipped in the Church as Saints which are tormented in hell fire for their sinnes This shift therefore of Bellarmine to wipe off the blot of Idolatry is but a silly one and blurres them more then they were before 7. Gregory de Valentia labours to creepe out at another hole to wit not by a distinction but by addition for hee would adde vnto the definition of Idolatry these words sicut Deo as to God and so Idolatry should bee not a giuing of diuine honour to a creature but when it is so giuen to the creature as vnto God Wherein as he vnmannerly crosseth his fellow Iesuite in calling the Images of Christ Idols and saying that they are to bee worshipped latria with diuine honour the one whereof Bellarmine simply and absolutely denyeth and the other he alloweth but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 respectiuely so likewise â—e crosseth reason Scripture Fathers and consequently all sound diuinity 8. For Reason If an adulteresse woman being taken in bâ—d with another man should excuse her selfe thus I am not guilty of adultery because though I lent the vse of my body to a stranger yet I did it not to him as vnto my husband would this excuse her no it would rather adde vnto her crime So the Romish harlot committing spirituall fornication with her Idols when shee goeth about to colour her crime with tâ—is vermillion I giue diuine honour indeed to Images but yet not as vnto God What doth shee else but adde carâ—all impudency vnto spirituall vnchastitie A filthy stopple
shew also how good workes to wit almse-deedes pilgrimages workes of supererogation vowed chastity voluntary pouerty Monkish obedience which they esteeme the chiefest good workes are made Idols in that they repose the confidence of their heart and the hope of saluation in them through the power of meriting which they ascribe vnto them as also how they turne their Sacraments into Idols by teaching that they conferre grace Ex opere operato by the very worke done and that effectiuely actiuely and immediatly they produce in the heart the grace of regeneration and iustification which is the proper and immediate worke of the Godhead but I passe ouer these many other things because they admit in shew some probable exception though no sound confutation and I insist in those things onely in which euery Ideot and almost Infant may discerne most grosse and palpable Idolatry And those are these fiue in number the bread in the Sacrament Images Reliques Angels and Saints departed And lastly the Crosse and Crucifix of which in order 14. The blessed Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ ordayned for a perpetuall remembrance of his death and passion and for the strengthning and nourishing of the soules of the faithfull to eternall life is transhaped by them into a most horrible Idoll For this they teach and practise that that very thing which to all the senses is but bread being but lately moulded and knead by the Baker is to be worshipped and adored with diuine worship because forsooth after consecration it is the true and naturall body of Christ And therefore at the Priests eleuation of the hoast they all fall downe vpon their knees and worship it with great deuotion and expect from it forgiuenesse of their sinnes and all manner of earthly and temporall blessings and whosoeuer refuseth to doe this is an Heretike 15. Their Apologie is that there is a reall and naturall presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament and therefore not the bread but the body of Christ into which the bread is transubstantiate is worshipped of them and so they thinke to free themselues To which I answere that if that were certaine then their defence was iust and their practice godly and we in calling them Idolaters for this cause should bee slanderers of the truth but seeing the contrary is rather certaine to wit that Christ is not corporally in the Sacrament but in heauen and that the bread remayneth still true bread both for matter and forme after consecration they cannot be excused from notorious Idolatry in worshipping a piece of Bakers bread in stead of Christ the eternall Sonne of God for to the outward senses it beareth the shape taste figure and colour of bread This is certaine and to the vnderstanding in reason it is bread because accidents cannot be without a substance this is as certaine and to faith it is bread because the Word which is the foundation of saith so calleth it after the words of consecration neither is there any Scripture to auouch the contrary saue that which may well receiue our interpretation as well yea better then theirs as the best learned amongst them confesse for Bellarmine confesseth that it may iustly bee doubted whether the Text this is my body be cleare inough to enforce transubstantiation And Scotus and Cameracensis thinke our opinion more agreeable to the words of institution and thus they haue against them sense and reason and faith and for them onely a doubtfull Exposition of two or three places of Scripture and therefore three to one but they are guilty of Idolatry 16. Besides graunt that there is a reall transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ yet the accidents of bread and wine remaine vnchanged and the forme and shape Now howsoeuer the learned may here distinguish their worship from the outward accidents to the inward substance yet the common people are not able so to doe but worship confusedly the outward accidents together with Christ contayned vnder them and so in that respect are Idolaters also for accidents be creatures as well as substances Yea and Bellarmine also doth allow them so to dâ—e for thus he writeth Diuine worship doth appertaine to the Symboles and signes of bread and wine so farre forth as they are apprehended as being vnited to Christ whom they containe Euen as they that worshipped Christ vpon earth being clothed did not worship him alone but after a sort his garments also Here is a braue straine of Diuinity they worshipped Christ in his clothes therfore they worshipped Christs clothes So Christ is worshipped vnder the formes of bread and wine therefore the formes of bread and wine must be worshipped This is like the Asse which bore vpon his backe the Image of Isis and when men fell downe before the Image he thought they worshipped him but hee was corrected with a cudgell for his sawcinesse and so are they worthy for their folly that cannot distinguish betwixt a man and his garments Christ and the signes of Christ but promiscuously confound the worship of the one with the other Rather therefore may we thus conclude they which worshipped Christ on earth did not worship his garments that he wore therefore they which will worship Christ in the Sacrament must not worship the outward Elements and so it will follow that as it had beene Idolatry in any to worship the garments of Christ so it is in the Romanists to worship the accidents of bread and wine 17. Lastly let it be supposed that there is such a reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament yet according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome no man can be certaine when it is because it depends vpon the intention of the Priest for thus they teach if the Priest should say the words of consecration without intention to consecrate the bread and wine he should effect nothing or if hee intend to consecrate but one hoast and there chance to be two or more then nothing is consecrated at all and so the intention of the Priest being vncertaine to the people there must needes be an vncertaine adoration and the Priest oftentimes intending nothing lesse then the matter it selfe which hee hath in hand there must needes be certaine and vndoubted Idolatry for if the bread and wine be not effectually consecrated as they are not without the Priests intention then Christ is not really present and so nothing is worshipped but the bare bread for remedy hereof they haue deuised two poore shifts one that the people must adore vpon a condition to wit if the due forme in consecrating bee obserued the other that an actuall intention is not necessarily required but onely a vertuall that is when an actuall intention to consecrate is not present at the very time of consecration by reason of some vagation of the minde yet it was present a little before the operation is in vertue
thereof 18. This is Bellarmines But to the first I answere That though the people ought to doe so that is adore vpon condition which notwithstanding is a thing neuer heard of before in any diuine worship and implieth necessity of danger yet because not one amongst a thousand doe so hauing neuer heard that distinction once named in their liues nor vnderstanding what it meaneth therefore they are for this neuer a whit freed from Idolatry To the second I answere that oftentimes the Priest hath neither actuall nor vertuall intention for what intent had the Monke Bernhardine that poysoned the hoast to the intent that he might poyson the Emperour Henry of Lucenburgh as he also did at the instigation of Robert King of Sicily What intent had that Priest that either did or would haue poysoned Pope Victor the second as witnesseth Baronius or those Priests that poysoned William Archbishop of Yorke for hee was poysoned at the Masse by the treason of his owne Chaplins both with that which was in the Chalice If the Priest bee an Athiest as many of the Popes themselues were what intention haue they of consecrating Christs body when they beleeue not that Christ hath a body or that there is a Christ now liuing in the heauens and sitting at the right hand of his Father to be present in the Sacrament or what intention can they haue to doe that which the Church doth when as they beleeue not that there is a Church but that all Religion is a fable and a matter of policy Here must needes be grosse and notable Idolatry by their owne confession for I argue Ex concessis that is out of their owne grounds So that we must iustly conclude notwithstanding all their distinctions and shifts that the Church of Rome in worshipping the consecrated hoast and that with such worship as is due vnto God is guilty of Artolatry that is of worshipping a piece of bread in stead of God then which what can be more Heathenish and palpable Idolatry 19. Secondly wee indite them of Idolatry for that they teach that Images are to bee worshipped with diuine worship and in their practice they giue vnto stockes and stones the honour which belongeth vnto God For this is their doctrine that the Images of the blessed Trinity and of Christ and of the Virgin Mary the mother of Christ and of other Saints are to be had and retained especially in Churches ijsque debitum honorem venerationem impertiandam and that due honour and worship is to be giuen vnto them they be the words of the Councill of Trent Now what that due honour and worship is that is a great question among them some thinke it is the same which appertaineth to the persons whom they represent as if it be the Image of God or Christ then it is to be worshipped latria that is with the highest degree of worship if of the Virgin Mary then with a little lower degree called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if of the Saints then with the lowest which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this is the tenet of many of their Rabbies as reporteth Vasques the Iesuite to wit Aquinas Caietane Bonauenture Alexander Coster and diuers others Others thinke that the Image is not to be worshipped at all but onely the Samplar before the Image Of this opinion were Durandus Alphonsus de Castro and some others but it is confuted by Catharine and vtterly reiected by Bellarmine A third sort were of opinion that Images ought to bee worshipped in themselues and properly with a lesse honour then the Samplar and therefore that no Image was to be worshipped with Latria Of this opinion were Peresius Catharinus Sanders Gabriel c. But the Councill of Trent which is their Church in the wordes of the decree and Bellarmine which is their chiefe champion doe manifestly incline to the first opinion for this is the summe of his propositions First that the Images of Christ the Saints are to be worshipped not onely by accident and improperly but euen by themselues and properly so that they doe limit the worship as they are Images and not onely as they stand in stead of their patternes Secondly that in truth and deed Images may be worshipped with the same kind of worship which belongeth vnto their patternes improperly and by accident and so with Latria in that condition Thirdly and lastly that though this be true yet especially in the pulpits and before the people it is not to be said that Images are to bee worshipped with this kind of worship but rather the contrary Heere is excellent diuinity the people must not bee taught the truth nay the contrary rather which is a lie and that in the pulpit beholde here a doctor of lies and that by his owne confession whilst he goeth about to maintaine Images which Habacuk calleth doctors of lies Hab. 2 18. 20. This is the summe of their doctrine Out of all which these three conclusions doe arise First that the blessed Trinity that sacred and incomprehensible deitie by their doctrine may be pictured on a wall and worshipped in or at an Image yea that such an Image ought at least improperly bee worshipped with the same worship that is due vnto God himself as whē they picture God the Father in the similitude of an old man God the Son in the likenes of a yong child God the holy Ghost in the likenesse of a Doue which the Scripture in the second Commandement condemneth as Idolatrie and that the intendment of that Commandement is not against the Images of false gods onely as the Romanists would haue it but also of the true Iehouah Moses the best expounder of himselfe teacheth most plainely Deut. 4. 16. when hee saith Take heed that you make not to your selues any grauen Image or representation of any figure for you saw no Image in the day that the Lord spake vnto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire and the Prophet Esay confirming the same exposition saith To whom will you liken God or what similitude will yee set vp vnto him Esay 40. 18. as if he should say it is impossible to represent God by any likenesse or similitude If they reply that they worship not the Image but God in the Image I answer First that the very Image of God is an Idoll by this Commandement and therefore the erecting of it to a religious vse is Idolatry Secondly that it is false which they say that they worship not the Image but God in the Image for their doctrine is contrary as hath beene shewed and their practice is contrary as shall be declared hereafter Thirdly though it be true which they alledge yet the worshipping of God before an Image is Idolatry for when the children of Israel worshipped the two golden calues at Dan and Bethel they were not such calues to worship the outward calues but
creature For as Augustine well obserueth Wee beleeue the Apostle we doe not beleeue in the Apostle and we beleeue the Church and not in the Church and therefore in the Apostles Creed where we say I beleeue in God wee doe not say I beleeue in the Catholicke Church but I beleeue the Catholicke Church whereby is plainely insinuated that none but God is to be beleeued in because to beleeue in a thing is to put our trust and confidence in that thing As for that place in the Epistle to Philemon it maketh nothing for this purpose for there the word Faith is referred to the Lord Iesus and Loue to the Saints neither ought Saint Hieromes authority more preiudicate vs in this interpretation then it doth them in many such like whom they reiect as they do the rest of the Fathers at their pleasures especially seeing no man else besides himselfe is of that minde at least wise if he vnderstand by faith to beleeue in the Saints and not to beleeue them onely the one whereof is proper to the Creator the other to the creatures 62. To the last I answere that Prayer is properly one of the sacrifices of the New Testament for here the sacrifices are not corporall but spirituall as may bee prooued in generall by that which our Sauiour saith Iohn 4. God will be worshipped in Spirit and truth And in particular by comparing Mal. 1. 11. with 1. Tim. 2. 8. for whereas Malachie prophecying of the Kingdome of Christ had said that Incense and a cleane offering should be offered to God in euery place Paul sheweth what is meant hereby when he commandeth to lift vp pure hands vnto God in euery place But suppose that it were improperly called a sacrifice yet it looseth not the knot for all kinde of sacrifices both proper and improper corporall and spirituall are due onely vnto God for to whome belongeth a Temple and Altar to him belongeth a sacrifice saith Saint Augustine but no Temple or Altar proper or improper is to be built or set vp to any but to God and therfore no sacrifice is to be offered but to him 63. Lastly touching the authority of the Fathers which are alleaged so frequently by Bellarmine to prooue the Inuocation of Saints and from which Cassander would draw this conclusion That it was not credible that those holy men would admit any doctrine or custome which they supposed to bee contrary to the Euangelicall and Apostolicall doctrine or detract any thing from the glory of God or the merit of Christ when as they vnderwent so heauie conflicts for Christs sake Here not to keepe the Reader in suspense referring a fuller satisfaction to this argument to a more fit place foure things are to bee noted first that for the space of two hundred yeares after Christ the Intercession and Inuocation of Saints were doctrines vnknowne vnto the Church and therefore they alledge no Father within that compasse saue Dionisius Areopagita Cap. 7. Eccles Hierarch which booke as diuers other that goe vnder that name Illyricus hath proued to bee counterfeit by impregnable reasons And Iraeneus Lib. 5. contra Haeres who saith that the Virgine Mary was made the Aduocate of the Virgine Eue by which hee could not meane that Eue did pray vnto Mary here on earth seeing Mary was not then borne when Eue liued nor that the Virgine Mary did pray for Eue whilst shee liued because then shee her selfe was not both which must needes be if by this testimony the Inuocation of Saints should be proued 64. Secondly those Fathers that liued in the next two hundred yeares speake of this matter very variously and doubtfully as if it were a doctrine which they knew not what to say to were not fully resolued in Thirdly of those Fathers which he alleageth though in some places they seeme to allow that custome which was then brought into the Church yet in other places they disallow the same Yea and they are disapprooued also of others that liued in the same age Thus true Athanasius condemneth Inuocation of Saints Orat. 2. 3. contra Arianos and false Athanasius alloweth it Sermon in Euangel de Sanctissima Deipara Basil approueth it but Nazianzene doubteth of it and Epiphanius that liued also about that time vtterly condemneth iâ— Chrysostome in some places seemeth to allow of it in others he speaketh against it and so doth Augustine and the rest as you may see at large prooued by Chemnitius in his examine of the Councill of Trent And that which is not to be forgotten they alleage many false and counterfeit Bookes vnder the name of the Fathers as Dionysius Areopagita Ecclesiast Hierar Athanas Serm. de Sanctissima Deipara Chrysost hom ad pop 66. and many others of the like impression as the same Chemnitius hath learnedly and vnanswerably prooued 65. Lastly those Fathers which doe defend this Inuocation yet do not defend it as it is now practised in the Church of Rome for first the Fathers if they did allow of this Inuocation yet it was in their priuate deuotions not in the publike Leiturgie of the Church for it cannot bee prooued that in any of the ancient Leiturgies this Inuocation was vsed vntill Gregorie the firsts time for as for that which was called Chrysostomes Masse all know it is a bastard brat and not a true Child of that good Father but in the Church of Rome it is practised in their publicke seruice and so is come from a matter of priuate deuotion to a generall practice of Religion Secondly the Fathers though they may seeme to haue prayed sometimes vnto the Saints out of the heate of their deuotion yet it was but now and then and as it were by the way whereas their ordinary prayers and deuotions were directed vnto God but in the Church of Rome the Saints are more prayed vnto then God he hath the least and they the greatest share in their deuotion witnesse the Letanie of the blessed Virgin Marie and the Marie Psalter and their Common practice Thirdly the Fathers albeit they directed their prayers sometimes to the Saints yet they reposed most confidence in their prayers to God and in the mediation of Christ as appeareth by that which Chrysostome saith Ad Deum non ostiarâ—o c. We need no Porter nor Mediator nor Minister to bring vs to God say but Miserere mei Deus c. And in another place hee saith that when wee pray our selues to God wee obtaine more then when others pray for vs. But the superstitious Romanists thinke to speede better when they pray to the Saints then when vnto God And therefore they are not ashamed to say that we must appeale from the Court of Gods iustice to the Court of his Mothers mercy Fourthly the Fathers did not so much as dreame of any merits of supererogation which should be in the Saints and by them should be communicated vntovs but all the interest
very shallow reasons as any may discerne that will but read him To omit I say all this by that which hath beene sayd it is most cleere that vnder the doctrine and practice of Inuocation of Saints in the Church of Rome lyeth lurking most abominable Idolatry 76. The last principall branch of Idolatry maintayned and practised in the Church of Rome is the adoration and worshipping of the Crosse Now by the Crosse they vnderstand eyther the true Crosse of Christ together with any part or portion thereof or the picture or image of that Crosse whether it bee materiall and permanent or transeunt and formall onely Of both which this is the doctrine of the Church of Rome that not onely that Crosse whereon Christ dyed but euery picture and representation of it whether grauen or payntedâ— or expressed in the ayre with the hand and fingers is to be kissed and adored This is the position of Vasques the Iesuite and hee saith that it is the doctrine and faith of the Romane Church And the same is auouched by Bellarmine and confirmed by many arguments weake ones God wot in three whole Chapters wherein hee laboureth to prooue first that the Crosse it selfe secondly that the Image of the Crosse and thirdly that the signe of the Crosse are all to be worshipped and with what kind of worship Aquinas resolues vs in that point wheÌ„ he affirmeth that the very Crosse of Christ whereon he was crucified is to bee worshipped with diuine worship for two causes both for the representation or resemblance it hath to Christ as also for that it touched the body of Christ but the signe of the Crosse or Crucifix is to be worshipped with latria onely in the former respect And this is still the doctrine of their Church for neither is it taxed in their late editions for errour nor contradicted by any other Romish Doctor Yea a late famous Papist and a professor of Diuinitie doth plainely confirme the fame dedicating his booke to Pope Clement the eighth for he saith in playne words that they worship the Crosse with the same worship wherewith they adore Christ him selfe and that they pray vnto the Crosse as vnto him that was crucified on it and repose the hope of their saluation vpon it 77. And this is the doctrine of the Romish Synagogue at this day and their practice is correspondent thereunto for they kneele vnto the Crosse they kisse it they creepe vnto it they pray vnto it yea they repose the hope of their saluation in it as appeareth in that forme of prayer vsed in their Masse booke All haile ô Crosse our onely hope in this time of Lent doe thou increase righteousnes in good men and graunt pardon to sinners Now that this is heathenish Idolatrie may appeare by these reasons First because outward religious adoration is giuen to a piece of wood or brasse or gold or some other matter Secondly because diuine worship euen latria which Augustine saith is proper onely vnto God is giuen to a creature for such is the Crosse at the best Thirdly because they pray vnto it as vnto a liuing thing Fourthly because they repose the hope of their saluation in it And lastly because many if not all of these Reliques which are beleeued to bee fragments of Christs Crosse are false and counterfeit as hath beene shewed already In all these respects the Crosse is made an Idoll and the worshippers of it are no better then Idolaters 78. Ob. I but the Crosse touched Christ and therefore it is to bee worshipped with diuine worship R. So did the Manger wherein hee lay being an infant and the Graue wherein he was layd being dead and the Pillar whereunto he leaned being whipped and the Asse where on hee rode being in his iourney to the City yea so did the wombe of the blessed Virgine his Mother before hee was borne and yet they will not say that any of these are to bee worshipped with latria I am sure the Apostles cannot bee found to haue giuen any maner of religious worship to any of these things much lesse diuine worship though I deny not but that the true Reliques of Christ and those things that any waies pertayned vnto him were reuerenced without doubt by his friends after his departure and so farre we also willingly condescend vnto them but that any religious worship was giuen vnto theÌ„ they can neuer prooue Ob. I but the Crosse was the instrument of Christs passion and Mans redemption and the Altar of that great Sacrifice and the Ladder by which Christ ascended into heauen therefore it is to bee worshipped R. So was Iudas an instrument of Christs passion and our redemption as Saint Augustine teacheth when he saith that Iudas was elected by Christ to the end that by him hee might fulfill our redemption and so was Pilate and Caiphas yet these are not therefore to be worshipped vnlesse wee will reuiue the old heresie of the Caiâ—nians and the Marrionites And so was the Speare that let out his heart bloud which was the price of our redemption and yet they themselues doe not giue diuine worship vnto it for that cause albeit they make an Idoll of it as hath beene declared Ob. I but many mysteries are signified by the Crosse as first Christian perfection in the longitude latitude height and profunditie of it the profundity signifying faith the height hope the latitude charitie and the longitude perseuerance Secondly the effect of Christs passion the highest peece of wood signifying that heauen was opened and God pacified the lowest that was fastned in the ground that bel was emptied and the Diuell conquered the ouerthwart peece that the whole world was redeemed c. Thirdly the vniting of Iewes and Gentiles the two armes of the Crosses vnder one title representing the vnion of two people vnder one head These and diuers other mysteries are hidden vnder the Crosse therefore it is to be worshipped with diuine worship R. Suppose that all these mysteries were there to be coÌ„ceiued yet to say that therefore it is to be worshipped is a silly reason and scarce befitting the learning of Bellarmine for by the same argument all their Sacraments and many other things should be worshipped with diuine worship Ob. I but the Crosse was miraculously found out by Helena and that not before Constantines time when it might safely bee worshipped and it was reuealed to bee the true Crosse by euident miracles therefore it is to be worshipped with diuine worship R. Graunt all this to bee true which notwithstanding may probably be questioned yet that this doth not prooue that the Crosse is to bee worshipped Helenes owne example doeth shew for as Ambrose writeth Shee worshipped not the wood of the Crosse but him that hung vpon the wood because this saith he is a heathenish errour c. neither can they euer prooue that it was therefore reuealed that it might be worshipped 79. Did
that is falshood to falshood now in this my taske is to demonstrate how it crosseth the word of God that is falshood to truth which being proued I hope no man which is not drunke with the poisonous cuppe of the whoore of Babylons fornication will doubt of the vanity and falshood thereof Now my purpose is not to enter into the lists of disputation and confute their opinions by strength of argument that combate hath beene valiantly performed by many of our Champions onely my intent is first to shew how their doctrines coÌ„tradict the plain text of Gods word and secondly to wipe away their subtle and intricate distinctions whereby they labour to make a reconciliation betwixt the word of God and their opinions which shall be my onely taske in this Chapter for it is to bee noted that there was neuer any generation so happie or rather so miserable in distinctions as the Romanists are they maintain their kingdomes by distinctions by them they blind the eyes of the simple dazle the vnderstanding of the vnaduised set a glose vpon their counterfeit ware couer the deformity of their Apostate Church and lastly extinguish the truth or at leastwise so darken and obscure it that it cannot shine so brightly as it would but in seeking to extinguish the light of truth they distinguish themselues from the trueth and as Iacob by his party-coloured stickes occasioned a brood of party-coloured sheepe and goates so they by their fond distinctions bring foorth a party-coloured and counterfeit Religion as I trust to lay open to the world in this discourse following 2. The maior or first proposition beeing without all controuersie I passe ouer in silence and come to the minor or second proposition which is that the Religion of the Church of Rome in many doctrines is apparently opposite to the word of God 3. The Gospell teacheth that 〈◊〉 one onely God is to bee inuocated and worshipped and that after that manner which he hath appointed in his word and that all the confidence of our saluation is to bee placed in him alone but the Romanists command not onely to inuocate God but also Angels and Saints departed and in time of danger to expect helpe and succour from them and to repose our trust and confidence in them also 4. Bellarmine distinguisheth and saith that God alone indeed is to be worshipped and inuocated with that kinde of adoration which is due onely vnto God but yet the excellent creatures may bee honoured and some of them inuocated not as gods but as such as are Gods friends that is with an inferiour kinde of worship 5. But these distinctions cannot extinguish the truth for first they giue by name the highest worship that can bee to wit Latria to the Image and reliques of Christ and the crosse and to a piece of bread in the Sacrament insomuch that Gregory de Valentia a famous Iesuite and Bellarmines compeere is in this regard driuen to say that some kinde of Idolatrie is lawfull Secondly if they should deny this yet their doctrine and practice doth apparently proclaime asmuch for when they say to their Agnus deis It breaketh and quasheth all sinne as Christs bloud doe they not equall them to Christ when they place their hope and confidence in Saints and reliques doe they not equall them to God when they pray that by the merit of a golden siluer or woodden crosse they may be freed from sinne committed doe they not equall it with our Sauiour that dyed on the crosse when they desire at the Saints hands grace and glory doe they not equall them to the God of grace and glory when they call the blessed Virgine the Queene of Heauen and giue vnto her one halfe of Gods kingdome euen the halfe of mercy doe they not equall her to her maker Lastly when they offer sacrifice to reliques and Images as namely burne frankincense set vp tapers offer the calues of their lippes doe they not equall them to God for all these dueties are proper and peculiar parts of Gods seruice and therefore in attributing them to creatures they giue vnto them plainely that seruice and worship which belongeth to God alone 6. The Gospell teacheth that remission of sinnes and euerlasting life is bestowed vpon vs freely not for any works or merits sake of our owne but for Iesus Christs sake the only begotten Sonne of God who was crucified for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification But the Romanists teach that wee are iustified and saued not by Christs merits onely but in part for Christs sake and in part for our owne contrition obedience and good works 7. Bellarmine answereth that their doctrine is falsely charged to say that sinners are iustified partly for their owne works sake and partly by Christ for saith hee by a distinction there bee three kinde of works one of those that are performed by the strength of nature onely without faith and the grace of God another of such as proceede from faith and grace but not from a man fully iustified and therefore are called works of Preparation as Prayer Almes Fasting Sorrow for sinne and such like and the third of such which are done by a man iustified and proceede from the Spirit of God dwelling in his heart and sheading abroad charity in the same Now concerning the first hee acknowledgeth that we are not iustified by them by the example of Abraham Rom. 4. and therefore that they most impudently belye their doctrine that fasten this opinion vpon them As touching the second he saith that these works Preparatiue are not meritorious of reconciliation and iustification by condignity and iustice yet in as much as they proceede from faith and grace they merite after a sort that is obtaine remission of sinnes The third sort of works hee boldly and confidently affirmeth to merite not remission of sinnes because that was obtayned before but euerlasting glory and happinesse and that truely and properly 8. This Bellarminian distinction may be distinguished by two essentiall qualities first Folly secondly Falsehood Folly for it maketh nothing to the taking away of the Antithesis before mentioned for when as he confesseth that the second kinde of works doe merite remission of sinnes after a sort and the third eternall life absolutely what doth â—e but acknowledge that which wee charge them withall and which himselfe reiected a little before as a slaunder namely that wee are iustified and saued partly by our owne merits and partly by the merits of Christ for the Gospell saith We are saued by Christs merits alone and he saith We are saued by our owne merits also And thus the folly and vanity of his distinction euidently appeareth 9. The falsehood sheweth it selfe in two things first in that hee affirmeth that they doe not teach that works done before grace doe merite any thing at Gods hand for though it be a Canon of the Councill of Trent charged with an Anathema If any
this Sacrament there is a cōmemoration of that sacrifice of the crosse which was once offered this he spake conuicted by the truth And the Councill of Trent also in another place doth almost if not fully speake asmuch when it sayth that Iesus Christ left to his Church a sacrifice by which that bloudy sacrifice which hee made vpon the crosse might bee represented and the memory thereof continued which if it be true then being conuicted by their owne consciences and confessions it remaines that that doctrine which holdeth that the masse is a true reall propitiatory sacrifice is opposite to the doctrine of the Gospell which teacheth the contrary and so this fourth Antithesis is safe and sound for all that Bellarmine can say against it 21. The Gospell teacheth that both parts of the Sacrament are to bee ministred to all Christians and of the cup it sayth expresly Drinke ye all of this but the Church of Rome hath decreed that none should drinke of the cup but the Clergie and that the people should content themselues with the other part of the Sacrament 22. Bellarmine distinguisheth of the word All and saith By it is not to be vnderstood all the faithfull but the Apostles onely which hee prooueth by Saint Marke who sayth that they dranke all of it that is all the Apostles which sate at table with our Sauiour Christ and not all the Christians that beleeued in him 23. But to his distinction not all Christians but all Apostles I answere that this is Bellarmines conceit or rather deceit and hee borrowed it of Andradius the famous expositer of the Councill of Trent but it is a miserable glosse woe bee to it that so soully corrupts the text first the fathers vnderstood by the vniuersall All all the faithfull and that the Apostles heere in this great action were not Pastors but sheep Christ himselfe the great shepheard beeing the distributer and diuider of this Sacrament I shall not need to repeat their words they are so euident and ordinary Let the margent direct the Reader to them if they desire satisfaction in this point 24. Secondly many of their owne Doctors so interprete it as Thomas Aquinas Durand Biel Alphonsus de Castro Lorichius the author of the glosse and diuers others Cassanders testimony shall stand in stead of all the rest he sayth plainly that the Westerne Church beleeued for a thousand yeeres that our Sauiour Christ gaue this Sacrament to his disciples representing the persons of all the faithfull and he addeth reasons why the wine as well as the bread was to bee receiued both for a more full representation of the passion of Christ and signification of our full spirituall nourishment in Christ and also the full and perfect redemption of our bodies and soules by the body and soule of our Sauiour This Cassander repeats to haue beene the opinion of the Latine Greeke Church for the space of a thousand yeeres What an vpstart distinction then is this of Bellarmine who notwithstanding ceaseth not to bragge that they haue all antiquity on their side 25. Thirdly wee haue Saint ` Paul thus interpreting the words of his Lord and Master who spake nothing but by the direction of the Spirit for whereas our Sauiour sayth Drinke yee all of it Saint Paul sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eat of this bread and drinke of this cup. But all must examine themselues before they come to the sacrament therefore all are enioyned to drinke of the Sacramentall cup let vs chuse then whom wee will beleeue whether Saint Paul or Bellarmine for Saint Paul interprets this All one way and Bellarmine cleane contrary 26. Lastly reason it selfe disapprooueth this exposition for first I would aske him whether that which our Sauiour commanded to bee done at his last Supper were to bee done once and no more or often euen to the end of the world If hee say once and no more the words will confute him which say Doe this in remembrance of me if often then by All he meant not the Apostles onely for the Apostles liued not till the end of the world Againe if by All was intended the Priests onely then not onely the people should bee excluded from the cup but from the bread also for if in these words Drinke ye all of it hee speaketh to Priests onely then in these words Eat ye all of it hee speaketh to none but Priests for they are both spoken to one and the same persons And thus the people should haue no part of the Sacrament at all for the same All that is in one is in the other And to conclude if the Apostles stood heere in stead of Pastors or Priests why did they not minister the Sacrament It is the part of a Priest as hee is a Priest to minister the Sacrament to others and when hee receiueth it himselfe then hee standeth for a common Christian and not for a Priest for a sheepe not for a shepheard But they did not minister but receiue therefore they stood not here for Priests but for the whole body of the faithfull And thus this distinction being battered by the testimony of fathers confession of their owne Doctors authority of Saint Paul and strength of reason doth fall to the ground like Babel and this fift Antithesis is nothing weakened by Bellarmines Sophistrie 27. The Gospell teacheth that true repentance or conuersion to God is an earnest sorrow of heart for sinnes committed and faith perswading that they are certainely remitted for Christs sake But the Church of Rome teacheth that contrition indeed is one of the parts of repentance but they faine that it meriteth a remission of sinnes and to it they adde auricular confession not commaunded by God satisfaction or voluntary workes by which they say that the punishments of sinne are satisfied that these also may be redeemed by money and purse-penance All which whole doctrine is very blasphemous against the merit of the Son of God who onely made satisfaction for our sinnes 28. Bellarmine heere from distinguishing falleth to rayling and accuseth vs of manifest lying and falshood in laying that to our charge which wee are not guilty of but whether is the lyar hee or wee let the Reader iudge First therefore that true repentance is not a bare sorrow of heart for sin but such a sorrow as is ioyned with and ariseth from faith appeareth by this because contrition without faith leads to desperation and not to saluation as the wofull examples of Cain Esau and Iudas declare and therefore the Romanists themselues doe not exclude all manner of faith from repentance but onely that faith which apprehendeth remission of sinnes by Christ which speciall faith whereby remission of sinnes is beleeued and obtained is ioyned with repentance Luke 24. 47. Act. 26. 18. This is our doctrine and it is warranted by the holy Scripture though it pleaseth Bellarmine to say that it is a
meates and that from all in generall and that to this end for the castigation and mortification of the body and not eyther for merite sake or that it is a thing vnlawfull or that wee may glut our selues with some kinde and may not so much as touch others vpon paine of heresie which is the doctrine of the Church of Rome This is all that S. Augustines words import which as they doe not deliuer them from opposition to the Gospell so they manifestly imply these two conclusions first that the Synagogue of Rome is not the Church of God for it forbiddeth marriage to Priests not as a lesser good but as a thing simply euill And secondly that they maintaine in this their Church that doctrine which of S. Paul is called The doctrine of Diuels for they forbid both Meates and Marriage at some times and to some persons as things sinfull and vnlawfull And whereas the Fathers almost in generall say that it is better for such as haue vowed continency to marry then to fall into the fire of lust they conclude filthily to their eternall disgrace It is better for a Priest to play the whoremonger and keepe a Concubine then after his vow of continency to be coupled in wedlocke 39. But Bellarmine couereth her nakednesse whereof he is as it seemeth some what ashamed with a figge leafe of a distinction for he saith that fornication is not simply better then marriage but in respect that a man hath before entred into a vow in which regard to marry after the vow is a greater sinne then to commit fornication and this hee proueth by an example from a married woman whose husband is eyther continually absent or sicke so that hee cannot performe the marriage debt vnto her It is not sayd vnto her It is better to marry then to burne but shee ought to keepe her faith to her husband and by fasting and prayer keepe vnder and tame the concupiscence of her nature and therefore saith hee that precept or permission Let him marry is not spoken to all but only to such as are free and not if they be bound and haue giuen their faith vnto God 39. To which I answere two things First I aske him whether this vow which 〈◊〉 talke of be onely against marriage or against all manner of incontinency If they say that it is the vow of chastitie and that it is against all manner of incontinency then how can it bee that it should bee broken more by marriage then by fornication by hauing a wife then by keeping a whore and that to marry in respect of the vow should be a greater sinne then to commit whoredome especially seeing marriage is Gods ordinance and fornication of the Diuels institution that an honourable and holy estate and this a filthy and vgly sinne If they say that the vow is against marriage onely then what a Religion is Popery that teacheth her people to vow against marriage and not against fornication against wiues and husbands but not against whores and varlets Surely that Religion that maintaineth this cannot be of God 40. Secondly to his example I answere Marriage cannot be inioyned to her that is married already albeit her husband bee eyther absent or impotent for that is contrary to Gods ordinance Mal. 2. 14. Mat. 19. 5. But the vow of single life is not Gods ordinauce especially in so high a degree as marriage is for at the most it is but a Council whereas the other is a flat Precept to all that cannot containe and besides they that are married may expect the blessing of God vpon them vsing the meanes for their restraint in a godly manner and begging continency at Gods hand because they are in a calling ordayned by God but they that are in a vow who either enter rashly or are thrust in against their wills and contrary to Gods Commandement not being able to abstaine but proudly presume vpon their owne strength how can they hope for Gods blessing vpon them to strengthen them against the temptations of the flesh And thus this example together with the distinction it selfe maketh no whit to the iustifying of their doctrine but that it still remayneth in plaine contrariety and opposition to the Gospell of Iesus Christ 41. The Gospell teacheth that there is one true and solide foundation vpon which the Church of God is built 〈◊〉 to wit our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ But the Romish congregation cryeth out that Peter and the ordinary succession of Popes and the Church of Rome is the foundation of the whole Church and that the Church is built vpon them and not vpon Christ alone 42. Bellarmine distinguisheth of foundations and saith that Christ is the primary and principall foundation of the Church but that doth not hinder but that there may be secundary foundations and for proofe thereof he alledgeth Ephes 2. 20. where it is said that we are built the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and Apoc. 11. 14. where the twelue Apostles are made the twelue foundations of the Church 43. To which I answere three things First that though it be trueâ—â— that the Apostles bee the secundary foundations of the Church layd vpon Christ the true Rocke and foundation as twelue goodly stones and that vpon them the Church is built to wit vpon Christ primarily and principally and vpon them secundarily yet it doth not take away the Antithesis of their doctrine to the Gospell for they say that Peter is the onely secundary foundation and that hee as the chiefest stone is layd next vnto Christ and the rest of the Apostles built immediately vpon him and mediately by him vpon Christ But those Scriptures say that the twelue Apostles are twelue precious stones laid one by one vpon Christ and not one vpon another and twelue foundations equally proportioned to each other and not one placed vpon the top of another and so it is true that as the prerogatiue of the onely singular foundation belongeth to Christ so the honour of being secundary foundations is equally deuided among the twelue Apostles and so Peter in this respect hath no greater prerogatiue then the rest And therefore this distinction deliuers them not from the snare seeing that it maketh all the twelue Apostles altogether ioynt-foundations of the Church and they would haue Peter to bee the onely foundation next vnto Christ vpon whom both the Church of God and the Apostles themselues are built 44. Secondly I answere that when the Apostles are said to be foundations of the Church it is not meant of their persons but of their doctrine as witnesse almost all the Fathers for concerning person it is true which Saint Paul saith No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is layd Iesus Christ 1. Cor. 3. 11. But the Romanists would not haue the doctrine of Peter but the person of Peter to be this foundation and for proofe thereof Bellarmine fetcheth this argument from the
And Salmeron a third Iesuite descending yet a stayre lower saith that the translation of the Scripture should be onely tillinguis of three tongues that is Hebrew Greeke and Latine in honour of the Trinitie Or as another saith Because thâ—se three tongues were onely sanctified vpon the Crosse Herevpon the Councill of Trent decreeth the olde vulgar Latine Translation of the Bible to be onely authenticall and alone to bee vsed in all publike Lectures Disputations Preachings and expositions And though Pope Pius Quartus forbade onely as Bellarmine saith such to read the Scripture as had not licence thereunto giuen them by their Priest or Confessor to wit such as could receiue no damage but profit by their reading yet Pope Clement the eighth as another Iesuite confesseth tooke away all faculty of giuing licence to any to read the Scripture or to retaine with them the common Bibles or any parts of the Old and New Testament in the Mother tongues so that as wofull experience hath taught it was in times past in this Land and is now in those places where the bloudie Inquisition is exercised a sufficient marke of an Heretike and cause of fire and faggot to bee found with a translated Bible in their houses or hands 10. This is their doctrine which how it ingendreth and nourisheth ignorance who seeth not seeing first it locks vp the fountayne of knowledge that few or none of the common sort can drinke of the waters thereof cleane contrary to that famous saying of learned Origene who compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well where not onely Iacob and his Sonnes that is the Learned but also the Cattell and the Sheepe that is the rude and the ignorant doe drinke and refresh themselues but these men barre out the poore sheepe and driue them away from the waters of life to no other end as it may be thought but that they should pine away with thirst and liue and dye in blindnesse and ignorance For if all sound and true knowledge is to be found in holy Scripture and therein is the whole counsell and will of God reuealed vnto vs so farre foorth as it concerneth our saluation it being the Epistle of the great Iehouah to his poore Subiects to enforme them of his will and pleasure how should they possibly clime to this true and sauing knowledge who are debarred from the place and meanes where it is to found and had and not permitted to reade this Letter or heare it read vnto them contrary to that doctrine of Nazianzene who saith that all Christians ought to come to Church and there read themselues or if they be not able heare others read vnto them the word of God 11. If they reply and say that it is enough for them to know the Traditions of the Church I answere that if there were as certaine ground for their Traditions to prooue them the word of God as there is of the Scripture then this allegation might carry some shew of reason but the vncertainty nouelty mutability and absurdity of many of them doe plainely shew that it is no safe course to repose the strength of our saluation vpon them but rather to flye to that foundation which is immooueable If they say that the people must be content for their knowledge to depend vpon their Priests and to draw it from their lippes and so by that meanes may attayne a sufficient measure of instruction I answere that the Priests are for the most part as ignorant as the people as shall be shewed afterward and if any be furnished with gifts yet they seldome teach the people and when they doe they preach in stead of Gods word their owne inuentions idle tales and meere tales and fables witnesse Cornelius Agrippa and Dante their Poet two no great enemies but fast friends to Popish Religion Now if a man should bee constrained to sup vp whatsoeuer euery sottish Priest or idle Fryer or craftie Iesuite doth belch foorth without examining doubtlesse hee should sucke downe much poyson in stead of wholsome iuyce If they say that there is multiplicity of good Bookes written to this end to instruct the people in the grounds of Religion and to stirre them vp vnto godlines and deuotion I answere there is indeede a great number of such Bookes which are so farre from gendring sound knowledge that they are no better then baits of Antichrist seruing to allure men vnder shew of deuotion vnto Idolatry and Apostacie from God for if they were sound and true why should Gods Booke which without all question is most sound bee prohibited and they admitted Why is it not lawfull to examine them by that rule and why should all Bookes else which any thing make against their Religion be suppressed and by great penalties forbidden Surely this sheweth that all their Bookes of deuotion are but rotten stuffe and meere hypocriticall deuices to deceiue the simple 12. Lastly if they say that all our translations are false and erronious and therefore that our Bibles are not the word of God I answere that indeede it is impossible to haue a Translation so exact perfect that no fault nor imperfection shuld be found therin neuertheles the chief faults in our translations are for the most part in respect of proprietie of words and phrases which are nothing repugnant to holy doctrine or good life and not in any materiall or substantiall poynt of faith and those also are not frequent but heere and there dispersed which can no waies hinder the profite to be gathered by the rest of the Scripture and if for some corruption in translations the Bible should not bee read then none but the originall Hebrew and Greeke should bee in vse for all translations are imperfect yea their so much extolled vulgar authorized by the Councill of Trent wherein the Diuines of Louane obserued many errors and Isidorus Clarius a Spanish Monke professed that hee found eight thousand fau'ts though for his plaine dealing hee was plagued by the Inquisitors and after that it was decreed authenticall by the Councill a thing worth the noting yet it was corrected and castigated by the authority and commaundement of sixe Popes successiuely Nay the Hebrew and Greeke copies themselues should not bee permitted for euen they if wee will beleeue the Romanists are full of corruptions but as Bellarmine saith of the corruptions in the Hebrew text so wee may truely of the imperfections in our translations Non sunt tanti momenti vt inijs quâ— ad fidem bonos more 's pertinent sacrae Scripturae integritas desideretur that is they are not of such moment that they can hinder the integrity of the Scripture in those things which pertaine to faith good manners 13. Moreouer besides all this it is no maruell if they contend for their vulgar Latine Bible that it should be onely authenticall seeing many Romish errors are thereby maintained which in the truth of yeâ—â—â— originall
haue no colour of defence And so this doctrine doth not onely vphold ignorance in the simple but also herefie among the learned As for example to prooue the intercession and patronage of the Virgine Mary they alledge that text of Genesis falsely translated Ipsa conteret caput Serpentis She shall bruise the Serpents head whereas the Hebrew truth hath most euidently He or It meaning the Seede of the woman and not Shee Againe to prooue their Masse Sacrifice they alledge that of Gen. 14. 18. Melchizedek obtulit panem vinum erat enim sacerdos whereas in the Hebrew text is no word that signifieth to offer but to bring foorth and the coniunction causall is also wanting They extenuate originall sinne by the corrupt translation of that text Gen. 8. 21. For whereas in the originall it is Figmentum cordis est tantum malum The frame of the heart is onely euill their translation hath The cogitation of mans heart is prore vnto euill To prooue their inuocation of Saints they obiect that of Iobs thus translated Ad aliquem Sanctorum conuertere which in the Hebrew is not an affirmatiue proposition but an Ironical Interrogation thus To which of the Saint wilt thou turne To proue that no man can be sure of the remission of his sinnes and saluation they alledge that corrupted text Eccles 9. 1. Nescit homo vtrum amore vel odio dignus sit whereas in the originall it is nothing but thus No man knoweth loue or hatred all things are before him That their Church cannot erre they labour to prooue by the promise of our Sauiour Ioh. 14. 26. where their translation thus speaketh Spiritus sanctus suggeret vobis omnia quaeâ—unque dixerâ— vobis but in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quaecunque dixi vobis Whatsoeuer I haue told you That Matrimony is a Sacrament they prooue by that place Ephes 5. 32. where their translation hath a Sacrament for a Mysterie So for their Merite of works they produce Heb. 13. where in their translation the word Merite is vsed which is not extant in the Greeke So to prooue that after Baptisme there remaine no Relikes of sinne they vse that text Heb. 9. 28. Christus semel oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda peccata now where all is drawne out there nothing remaineth and yet in the originall there is no such word Lastly the Councill of Trent it selfe to prooue that the Church may dispense with the Sacraments contrary to Christs institution and alter them abuseth that text 1. Cor. 4. 1. where the Ministers are called Dispensatores mysteriorum Dei whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth no such matter Thus wee â—ee great cause why they should stand vpon this vulgar Latine onely because it affoords vnto them such pregnant proofes for the defence of their grosse errors It defends them and their errors therefore they haue reason to defend it And thus by forbidding the Scriptures to bee read of the people they multiply ignorance and by allowing onely their Latine translation for authenticall they hatch heresie 14. Secondly their doctrine which commandeth Prayers to be made publikely and priuately in an vnknowne tongue tendeth to the same end for though touching priuate prayers they agree not amongst themselues some affirming that the people ought not to say their Pater noster Aâ—e Maria and Mattens in any tongue but the Latine because this hath beene the ancient custome of the Church as they pretend Others that it is lawfull to pray in our natiue tongues but yet if we doe pray in Latine it is not vnfruitfull Notwithstanding their continuall practice sheweth their most approoued opinion for among them all you shall hardly finde one in an age that vseth any other but Latine prayers but as for publike prayers in the Church it is the doctrine of the Councill of Trent armed with a curse that no part of the Diuine Seruice and publike Leiturgie bee celebrated in a knowne tongue Now how can this but noozle the people in ignorance when they are taught to babble out in their deuotions like Parrats without vnderstanding what they say Surely this must needes bee a blinde deuotion and an ignorantzeale when the tongue shall pray or rather prate and the heart not vnderstand what it vttereth for if true deuotion be a religious offering vp of the whole man both body and soule and euery facultie and part of both to God by way of spirituall sacrifice then certainely that cannot bee true deuotion but blinde delusion when the affection and the tongue shall bee lifted vp in prayer and in the meane while the vnderstanding shall be idle not knowing what the affection and tongue doth seeing the proper worke of the intellectiue part of the soule is to know and vnderstand which by this meanes it is depriued of And this is that which both Aquinas their Angelicall Doctor purposely confesseth and Rabbi Bellarmine also himselfe though vnawares for the one saith that he which vnderstandeth not what he prayeth is depriued of the fruit of his deuotion and the other that except the prayer be vnderstood no consolation at all can be reaped thereby Ignorance therefore must needes bee cherished by this doctrine seeing the vnderstanding which is the seat of knowledge is muffled and the best fruit that can arise hence-from is blinde zeale and ignorant deuotion by which the Iewes crucified Christ the Gentiles persecuted the Church of Christ and taught that in so doing they did God good seruice for deuotion without zeale is like an Arrow shot out of a childs Bow which falleth to the ground without doing hurt or good and zeale without knowledge is like a Shippe carryed with full winde and displayed Sailes without a Pilot to sterne and guide it in the right course 15. Thus for the maine doctrine Now the accessarie attending vpon it is more dangerous then the maine it selfe for they are taught not onely thus to pray but that these prayers are meritorious of saluation and that hee which saith a certaine number of them shall haue thus many dayes and thus many yeeres pardon as 3000. dayes for saying a short prayer in the Primer ten thousand dayes for saying fiue Pater nosters before the Vernacle twenty thousand dayes for saying a short prayer at the Leuation yea a hundred yeeres for saying our Ladyes Psalter euery Saturday yea fiue hundred yeeres for saying a short prayer which Saint Gregory made and a number such like as hath beene before sufficiently discouered Now if pardon of sinnes and saluation may be merited by mumbling vp euery day on their Beades these short and vncouth prayers what need any seeke for further knowledge in the word of God If these bee sufficient as they make the people beleeue then all further instruction must needs be thought vnnecessary and so it cannot choose but follow that a deluge of blindnesse
brethren but the Cardinals Patriarkes and Archbishops Emperours and Kings are his children and not his brethren behold his pride neither did the rest of the Apostles challenge to themselues any such titles of dignity For they had learned of Christ their Lord and master not to Lord it ouer others but to humble themselues that they might bee exalted And let them name but one Bishop of the Primitiue Church that tooke vpon him any of these glorious titles yea of the Bishops of Rome themselues 11. Wee deny not but that some of the ancients haue yeelded vnto the Bishops of Rome great and honorable titles but first this was in respect of their vertue learning and integrity and not in respect of any preeminence of iurisdiction Secondly wee find none of these titles which I speake of attributed vnto them but onely the Apostles successours and Apostolicall Bishops not heads of the Church vniuersall Bishops high Priests of the world c. which the later Popes haue vsurped And thirdly if at any time they were yet the same titles of honour which were ascribed vnto them wee finde giuen to other Bishops aswell as to the Bishop of Rome as to Saint Ambrose by Saint Basill and to one Lupus a Bishop in France by Sidonius Apollinaris And to Fontellus another Bishop in France by the same man To Basill by Nazianzene To Athanasius who is saluted by the name of high Bishop and chiefe Priest And to Cyprian who was honoured with this stile The Bishop of the whole world Neither can it bee denyed but these titles grew by little and little to be attributed to the Bishops of Rome after the first three hundreth yeers of the Church though they came not to perfection till the perfect reuelatioÌ„ of Antichrist in the Apostolical sea but this can neuer bee proued that either in the Apostles times or in two hundreth yeeres next succeeding after euer any Bishop arrogated to himselfe or any other ascribed vnto him any of these arrogant titles 12. A sufficient argument whereof is this that Bellarmine propounding this as his last reason to proue the principality of the Pope draweth it from the great and famous titles which are attributed vnto him and spending a whole Chapter in that purpose alledgeth not one testimony older then Damasus the Bishop of Rome who was elected to that sea in the yeere 369. Surely if he could haue found out more ancient proofes he would haue after his manner stuffed the Chapter with them but in that hee produceth none it is euident that hee knew none indeed that there were none to be known Nay Gregory the great one of their owne Popes that liued sixe hundreth yeeres after Christ not onely execrated the name of vniuersall Bishop which Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople vsurped calling it a name of blasphemy and a proud and superstitious title and him that vsurped it a fore-runner of Antichrist but also plainely auoucheth that none of his predecessors vsed that prophane denomination by which the proud times of Antichrist were marked out Also Platina Nauclerus Cuspinian with many other Historiographers affirme that Boniface the third and Gregory the second obtained of the Emperour Phocas by great labour the name of Head of the Church A strange and tyrannical title neuer publikely vsurped before that time in the Church of God but now new created by Phocas who hauing killed his Lord Mauritius and his children exercised a tyranny in the kingdome of the world and begate this tyrannicall appellation in the kingdome of the Church But of all other records of antiquity most pregnant is the Canon of the Africane Council to condemne the nouelty of these ambitious nominations of which thus writeth our Roffensis These are the words of the Councill Let not any no not the Romane be called an vniuersall Bishop For that age sayth he which was neere to the Apostolicall times studied modesty and humility such a glorious title pleased not that Councill 13. Wherefore concerning these great titles of honour wee may conclude with our Sauiour Christ that It was not so from the beginning They are new and vpstart in respect of true antiquity ensignes of that pride and arrogancy which reigned in the Prelates of the Church in those latter times and badges of Antichrists kingdome where at Peter and Paul would blush for shame if they were aliue as it was merrily spoken by the Duke of Vrbanes Painter when he had drawne their Pictures of a ruddy and high colour 14. But leauing their titles let vs take a short suruey of their practice And first let it bee showne that Peter or Paul or any the rest of the Apostles or any Bishop of Rome or of any other place did euer take vpon them to depose Kings and dispose of their kingdomes and to translate them from one to another and to absolue subiects from their oath of alleageance and children from the bond of obedience to their parents to dispense with the Law of God to haue sole power of decision of controuersies to challenge the right of appeales from all countreyes of Christendome And lastly to exercise not onely spirituall but also temporall coactiue iurisdiction But all this power hath beene in former times and is at this day practised by the Bishop of Rome and that with that rigour and vehemency that it is a wonder that they doe not blush so much to degenerat from those whose successors they claime to be But no maruaile for els he should not shew himselfe to bee that Antichrist except hee did aduance himselfe aboue all that is called God on earth For this is a special marke of that man of sinne 15. But let History the light of time make cleare this point Pope Hadrian the fourth reprooued Frederick Barbarosse the Emperour of insolency and arrogancy in an Epistle written vnto him for setting his owne name before his and checked him also very bitterly for holding his stirrup on the wrong side and when hee came vnto him in the Church of Saint Marke in Venice to bee absolued from his excommunication commanded him to prostrate himselfe vpon the ground and then set his foote on his necke with these words Super aspidem c. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and Cocatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lyon and Dragon Did Peter euer doe the like Gregory the seuenth caused Henry the â—ourth comming in all humility to submit himselfe vnto him with his wife and childe to dance attendance at his gate bare-footed and bare-headed for the space of three dayes ere hee would grant them any accesse vnto him Did Peter euer doe the like Celestine the third being about to crown Henry the sixt Emperour set the imperiall Diademe on his head as some say with his foote and kicked it off with his foote againe Did Peter euer doe the likeâ— Innocent the second caused his owne Picture with the Emperours to bee set vp in the Palace of
vsed by Christ himselfe or his Apostles and therefore must of necessity be grosse and palpable Innouations 29. From the Eucharist let vs looke backe to the ceremonies of Baptisme and first to their baptizing of Bels and of Gallies and Ships secondly exorcisme and exufflation thirdly anointing with oyle and crossing and fourthly salting and spittling lastly threefold Immersion or dipping the Infant all which are palpable nouelties so confessed by the Romanists themselues neither can they euer shew that these ceremonies were either commanded by Christ or practised by Iohn Baptist or the Apostles and though some of them as the crosse and anointing are of great antiquity and were then and may bee still lawfully vsed as things indifferent yet in their Church where such an opinion of necessity is laid vpon them that Baptisme is not effectuall without them they are meere Innouations no wayes warranted by any antiquity 30. Lastly I propound as their feasting so their fasting dayes together with the manner of fasting vsed amongst them as first the Lent fast of fourty dayes which their Iesuite Azorius confesseth not to bee of diuine ordinance and the variablenesse of the vse thereof doth prooue no lesse some Churches continuing the same full sixe weeks as the Illyrians Lybians Egypt and Palestina some seuen weekes as they of Constantinople with the nations adioyning some but three weekes and those dispersed within the six or seuen as occasion serued some againe three weekes immediatly going before Easter and lastly some two onely as the followers of Montanus all this is recorded by Sozomene in his History by which it is euidently euinced that this fast was no Apostolicall institution nor yet any childe of true antiquity for if it had there could not haue beene any such variety in the obseruation thereof 31. Secondly their fast of 4. times coÌ„monly called Ember weekes was first deuised by Pope Calixtus as would witnes Polidore Virgill if he were not gelded by these strange bookpurgers but though he be silent yet their own Platina telleth asmuch Thirdly their tying of fasts to certaine set dayes as the fourth and sixt day of the weeke was not allowed in Saint Augustines time for hee thus writeth against Vrbicus that stroue for the Saturdayes fast I read in deed that wee are commanded to fast but which ought to bee the dayes of our fasting I finde not prescribed in the Euangelicall or Apostolicall writings nor in his scholler Primasius his age for thus sayth he There is no Law set down concerning fasting but as euery man can or will nor in Socrates time who liued about the yeere 440. for hee plainly testifieth that the rites and obseruations of fasting were by the Apostles left to euery mans free liberty and choyce 32. Lastly their manner of fasting which is twice to refresh their bodies on the fasting day at noone by a small dinner and at night by a short supper Bellarmine himselfe confesseth to bee contrary to the ancient custome which was to eate but one meale on the fast day and that a supper and doth also giue diuers reasoÌ„s of this mutatioÌ„ As first that thogh it bee tolerated in their Church yet it is not commanded Secondly that those customes which are not grounded vpon Gods word may by ecclesiasticall Lawes bee varyed according to the diuersity of time place thirdly that when the ancients broke off their fast at the ninth houre they vsed to dyne at the sixt that is noone and therefore when as many doe ordinarily dyne at the third houre they may by like proportion breake off their fast at the sixt these be Bellarmines reasons to maintaine this Innouation whereby we may both behold what silly props hee hath to vphold his rotten cause and also that by his owne confession this is a meere nouelty and therefore he concludes that notwithstanding these forenamed reasons yet they doe better who after the ancient custome eate nothing till the ninth houre and in Lent till the euening And thus wee see how in the principall ceremonies of their Church they haue degenerate from the vsage and custome of all pure antiquity 33. Thus much of the outward face of their Church Now let vs examine a little their doctrines wherein they differ from vs which are the sinewes and nerues thereof here I might referre the Reader ouer vnto our learned and godly Country-man Doctour White lately deceased who in his high-way to the true Church obiecteth eight points wherein the moderne Church of Rome hath varyed from that which formerly was maintained notwithstanding I will also a little touch vpon the same strings adding somewhat more both in points and proofes then is there deliuered that the Reader may haue also heere some satisfaction concerning these matters 34. First therefore it is an article of the Romish faith that the Virgin Mary whom wee honour as a blessed woman and the mother of our Lord was conceiued and borne without the staine of originall sinne This doctrine was decreed 〈◊〉 an article of faith in the Councill of Basill in the yeere 1431. and afterwards was approoued by the Councill of Trent and by Pope Sixtus the fourth yea and all that take any degree in the profession of diuinity in the vniuersity of Paris first sweare that they will defend this prerogatiue of the Virgin Mary Now that this is a nouelty appeareth first because it was not receiued as an article of faith before the Councill of Basill Secondly because the Fathers generally either vtterly denie it to bee a truth or at least doubt of it Saint Chrysostome sâ—â—tly denyeth it Saint Bernard calleth it in plaine termes a nouelty Caietane reckoneth fifteene fathers to haue beene of a contrary opinion others two hundreth others three hundreth as witnesseth Salmeron the Iesuite and lastly Canus peremptorily affirmeth that all the Fathers contradicted it And it is to be noted that whereas Bellarmine produceth twelue Fathers for the proofe thereof not one of them doe directly affirme it except one or two Thirdly because the Elder Schoolemen with one consent disapprooued it as Dominicus Bannes Turrecremata Thomas Aquinas Bonauenture and others in so much that in this point they are driuen to this grosse shift That yonger diuines are more apprehensiue of truths then were the more ancient Doctours Bellarmine I confesse in this point accuseth vs of slendering their doctrine because hee sayth it was neuer held in their Church as an article of saith as wee say it is but by his leaue if it was the decree of one Councill though not confirmed by the Pope as he saith the Councill of Basill was not and was allowed by another Councill confirmed by the Pope to wit the Councill of Trent as an holy opinion and agreeable to the Catholike faith and approued by diuers Popes as hee confesseth and defended generally in their Church not onely by doctrine but by a solemne obseruation of a festiuall day in memoriall
of Gregory their owne Pope who allowing onely an historicall vse of them forbad them to bee worshipped as testifieth Agrippa Indeed wee confesse that there was in these Primitiue times of the Church an historicall vse of Images as may appeare by that statue of our Sauiour at Cesarea mentioned by Eusebius and the Pictures of Peter and Paul in the same author and of the good shepheard seeking the lost sheepe painted vpon their Chalices in Tertullian But wee shall neuer finde in any good author that either they were receiued into Churches or worshipped in any religious manner 46. Lastly it is a knowne and confessed truth that Images were neuer generally receiued inioyned vpon the Church vntill the second Nicene Council which was eight hundreth yeeres after Christ and also that the decree of that Councill was abrogated by another Councill held at Frankeford not long after so that it is manifest that the petigree of this bastard is of no great continuance not fetched from the Primitiue Church which is the thing we haue in hand to prooue but springing vp in the more corrupt times when superstition had darkned the light of true Religion and almost banished it out of the world 47. Another article of their Religion is that the Pope hath a supremacy of power ouer all euen Princes not onely in spirituall matters but euen in temporall which to bee a late deuice not warrantable by true antiquity may be easily demonstrated For vpon those words of Saint Paul Let euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers Chrysostome and Occumenius write thus That whether it bee a Priest or a Monke or an Apostle hee must bee subiect to the ciuill Magistrate for this subiection doth not ouerthrow piety and if an Apostle then the Pope as Aeneas Siluius who was after a Pope himselfe inferreth yea Espensaeus goeth further and sayth that not onely Chrysostome but Theodoret Theophilact and all the Greeke Doctours and in the Latine Church Saint Gregory and Saint Bernard did from that place teach that eueryl Apostle and Prophet and Priest was commanded to acknowledge subiection vnto Emperours Saint Ambrose sayth plainely that the Church lands and Church men themselues did pay tribute to the Emperour and if tribute then subiection Saint Augustine sayth that it is generale pactum societatis humanae abedire Regibus suis The generall couenant and bond of humane societie to obey Kings If the Pope then bee a man by Saint Augustines rule hee must bee subiect yea Gregory the first himselfe auoucheth plainely that power ouer all men is committed by GOD Dominorum meorum pietati to the piety of my Lords where hee not onely subiecteth all none excepted to the Imperiall power but also calleth the Emperour his Lord but now the Pope is the Emperours Lord and not the Emperour the Popes as Bellarmine speaketh without blushing when he sayth Non sunt ampliùs Reges Clericorum superiores c. Kings are not any longer superiours to Clerks and therefore Clerks are not bound to obey them by Gods Law and thus in generall the Pope had not this supremacy till Gregories time 48. For particulars one part of this supremacy is that the Pope is absolutely aboue a Councill which notwithstanding was condemned by the Councils of Constance and Basill And as Cardinall Cusanus confesseth was not acknowledged in the dayes of Saint Augustine Pope Gregory and other Fathers and Councils which liued before the first six hundreth yeere Another part is that appeales should bee made to the Pope from all places which the Councils of Chalcedon Africke Mileri and Constantinople vtterly withstood and interdicted A third is that peculiar cases of conscience should bee reserued to the Popes consistory which their owne Salmeran confesseth to haue not beene vsed in the time of Cyprian who liued two hundreth and fourty yeeres after Christ A fourth is the claime of Inuestitures which by consent of history was brought in first by Pope Hildebrand as witnesse Malmsbury Nauclerus Sigibert with others A fift authority to depose and molest Princes which no Orthodoxall Father for the space of 1000. yeeres taught or approoued as sayth their owne Barclay and the first Pope that practised this was Hildebrand surnamed Gregory the seuenth as witnesseth Espensaeus or at the highest Gregory the third who attempted this rebellious practice against Les the Emperour for defacing Images as Platina confesleth A sixt a supereminent prerogatiue in calling Councils and dissoluing the Acts thereof at his pleasure both which are notorious nouelties for the first eight generall Councils were called by Christian Emperours and the decrees of Councils were of so sacred authority that the better sort of Popes in the purer times put great Religiō in changing them or varying from them in any respect witnes Aeneas Siluius Victorine and Cardinall Cusanus Lastly a seuenth the fountaine of Episcopall Iurisdiction challenged to reside in the Pope alone and from him to bee imparted to other Bishops at his pleasure which was a doctrine not known in Saint Cyprians time nor in Saint Ieromes as hath beene shewed before In a word there is no colour of antiquity for any part of this transcendent Iurisdiction and yet the very soule and life of Popery consisteth therein 49. Of the same stampe is their doctrine of receiuing the Sacrament vnder one kinde and withholding the cup from the peoples this was first decreed by the Council of Constance and afterward established by the Trent conuenticle and hath euer since beene practised in the Church of Rome vnder paine of excommunication But that it is a grosse innouation wee need no further testimony then of the two foresaid Councils the one whereof sayth that in the Primitiue Church both kinds were receiued and that this custome of one kinde onely came afterward in and the other striketh with anathema all them that shall say that the Catholike Church hath not altered this custome vpon iust causes by which words it confesseth that there is an alteration of ancient custome now what the causes were of this alteration I will not here report let the Reader behold them in Bellarmine Gerson and Lyranus and wonder that Christs ordinance the generall custome of the primitiue Church should be altered annihiled vpō so sleight friuolous and foolish grounds adde vnto these Councils the wirnesse of their owne Cassander who directly affirmeth that this custome of communicating vnder one kinde inuaded not the Latin Church vntill the yeere of our Lord 1300. To the same purpose might bee alledged their owne ancient Lyturgies the decrees of their owne Popes and the generall doctrine of their schoole and lastly the consent of Fathers all which doe most clearly proue this doctrine to be a nouelty if not an heresie Their Lyturgies are plaine that the cup was ministred to the people and not appropriated to the Priests as may be seene in them Among their
without question an Innouation 55. Secondly that it is contrary to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles appeareth by this because the Apostle Saint Paul sometimes calleth the ministration of the Sacrament a breaking of bread and that through housholds By which is necessarily insinuated a distribution and dispensation of it to others besides the Priest Sometimes the communion or communication of the body and blood of Christ Yea the Apostle sayth plainly that wee that are many are one bread and one body because wee are partakers of one bread but if it bee priuate then there is no communion neither are there many and neither is the bread which is made of many graines of corne nor the wine crushed out of many grapes a representation of the mysticall body of Christ as all diuines confesse aswell as of the naturall if there bee no mysticall body that is no Congregation to participate Lastly Chrysostome writing vpon 1. Cor. 11. sayth that this was the fault which the Apostle blameth in the Corinthians because they made that priuate which was the Lords for the Supper of the Lord sayth hee ought to bee common 56. Thirdly what the example of the Primitiue Church was after the Apostles the ancient Lyturgies then in vse doe declare in none of which can wee finde any colour for this practice which euidence caused iudicious Cassander to confesse that solitary Masses are most manifestly confuted by the ancient Greeke Lyturgies and that which hee sayth of the Greeke may bee iustly auerred of all the other ancient missals that were in vse of the Church and are extant in the writings of the Fathers as Chrysostomes Ambroses Gregories and such like yea the Canon of the Romish masse it selfe is against this errour for it is said there As many of vs haue beene partakers and Blesse O Lord these Sacraments to vs which wee haue receiued Now how can this bee said without mockage when there is none present but the Priest 57. But besides those Lyturgies wee haue the plaine testimonies of ancient Fathers one Chrysostome for breuities sake shall stand insteed of all hee thus propoundeth the custome of the Church in his time The dayly oblation sayth he is made in vaine when there is none to participate and again Whosoeuer is not partaker of the mysteries stand by as a foolish and wicked man This is flat contrary to the Romish practice where the Priest masseth alone the people kneele by knocking their brests and lifting vp their eyes to their breaden God you see then there was no such custome in Chrysostomes time and this further may bee confirmed by the tenth Canon of those that are called Apostolicall which doth forbid any to be present but such as doe communicate saying that they are disturbers of the order of the Church the same Canon also is repeated and confirmed in the Councill of Antioch cap. 2. And in the Councill Naxâ—â—tense it is said that it is a ridiculous thing to murmure to the walles that which should belong to the people Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth that it is a more perfect and lawfull Masse where communicants are present then where they are absent so doth Cardinal Humbertus and Walasred all which laide together caused Erasmus and Cassander in expresse words to affirme this practice to bee a nouelty not instituted by Christ nor vsed either in the Apostles times or in the Primitiue Church 58. The next point may bee touching the sacrifice in the Masse for they teach that there is offered vp by the Priest a true reall propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead this is the direct doctrine of the Romish Church canonized in the Councill of Trent which doctrine how true it is I will not dispute onely I am to shew how new it is which may appeare first in that throughout all the new Testament where there is any mentioÌ„ made of the Lords supper there is not one word spoken of a sacrifice for neither doth our Sauiour himselfe say that hee offered a sacrifice when he first instituted it neither doth Saint Paul call it by that name when hee deliuers the full doctrine thereof to the Corinthians neither doth Saint Luke affirme that the Apostles offered a sacrifice when they put it in practice but onely that they broke bread from house to house now if this had beene so essentiall a part of the Eucharist as the Romanists make it yea if it had beene any part at all our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would neuer haue concealed it from the Church 59. If they obiect that though a sacrifice bee not mentioned yet it was acted both because Melchizedek was a type of Christ and he offered bread and wine and also because these words Hoc facite Doe this asmuch as Sacrificate sacrifice I answere that neither did Melchizedek offer bread and wine but brought it foorth onely to the refreshing of Abraham and his fellowers as the Chaldy Paraphrase the Greeke interpretours Iosephus Cyprian and Chrysostome doe interpret the place and the words themselues in the originall doe import neither doth the verbe facere signifie to sacrifice in that place seeing as euery schoole-boy knoweth then it should bee construed with an Ablatiue and not with an Accusatiue case as heere it is and this they themselues doe euidently prooue when they cannot agree among themselues in which action of the Sacrament consisteth the essence and perfection of this sacrifice whether in the eleuation which Sotus thought to belong vnto it or in the consecration as Suares or in the oblation as Ecchius or in the intinction as Canus or in the dispensation and distribution as others or in the consumption as Bellarmine and Ledesima and so they know not where to fixe the center thereof hauing indeed no footing in the whole circle of our Sauiours example 60. And as for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by Saint Luke it signifieth no more but Sacra administratio the performance of holy duties or the seruing of God in any sort of religious worship as the Fathers doe all interpret the place and not to offer a sacrifice as Erasmus translates it or to say Masse as our Rhemists would interpret it for then the Angels should say Masse in Heauen because they are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 1. which some of them are not ashamed to say they doe but I beleeue it all alike as I doe that tale in their Legend of Bees singing Masse in their Hyue about the hoste put in by 2 woman to make her swarmes to thriue Againe of the like nature is that fond conclusion of Genebrard who because by the Leuitical Law God coÌ„manded Cakes of new corne to be offered vpoÌ„ the day of Pentecost which is there called A new offering therefore the Apostles sung the first Masse vpon that great day of Pentecost Act. 2. and that Iames being Bishop of Hierusalem was the chiefe
actour therein This is so grosse that it needs no refutation and it sheweth plainely the point I ayme at that there is no colour for their Masse in the new Testament seeing they are constrained to fetch it out of the old especially by so ridiculous and strange a deduction 61. Secondly if wee consult with the primitiue and pure antiquity wee shall neuer finde any iust testimony for the Romish propitiatory sacrifice for the expiating and purging away of sinnes for albeit the Fathers doe often call this Sacrament a sacrifice yet their meaning is not that it is a true proper and reall sacrifice but onely either a commemoration and representation of the sacrifice of Christ finished on the Crosse or an application and obsignation of the same to the faithfull receiuers which to bee their intendment may be gathered first from their owne testimonies which are so cleare and direct that I shall not need saue to referre the Reader to the places quoted in the margent And secondly by Lumbard their prime Schooleman and profest Epitomizer of the Fathers especially of Saint Augustine who sayth expresly that that which is offered and consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a commemoration and representation of the true sacrifice made vpon the altar of the Crosse And thirdly by their constant ascription to the sole sacrifice of Christ the onely power of propitiation and satisfaction for sinnes which if it be true then when they call the Masse A propitiatory sacrifice they must of necessity vnderstand not a reall sacrifice but onely a representation and application of that onely true sacrifice on the Crosse besides which there is no other externall and corporall sacrifice in the new Testament as Lactantius plainely witnesseth when hee sayth that those things which are wrought by the fingers or done without a man are not true sacrifices 62. Lastly if it bee granted that many of the ancients did speake of a proper and true sacrifice yet the theatricall pageant of the Romish Masse cannot bee vnderstood by them both because in the ancient description of the rites and orders of the Church found in Iustine Martyr Dionysius Chrysostome Augustine and others no such histrionicall representation in ceremonies gestures words and acts is to be seene and also because the Romish Doctours themselues confesse that the rites and ceremonies therein vsed were not in the Apostles times but crept in by little and little and were patcht together at diuers times and by diuers persons as their fancies led them now the sinewes of the Masse consisteth in these and therefore these beeing confessed nouelties how is it likely that the thing it selfe should be of a different nature 63. The fire of Romish Purgatory is a bird of the same feather it was neither kindled in the Scriptures neither is it found in ancient Councils or in the writers of the Primitiue Church nor yet in those that next succeeded the age therof I vnderstand here Romish Purgatory to wit such as is taught maintained in the Church of Rome at this day as an article of faith and is thus described A fire of hell adioyning to the place of the damned wherein the soules of the faithfull departing in the guilt of veniall sinnes or for the more full satisfaction of mortall sinnes already remitted are tormented which is nothing differing from the punishment of the damned in respect of the extremity of the paine but onely in respect of continuance of time the confession of this Purgatory sayth Bellarmine is a part of the Catholike faith and it is decreed by the Council of Trent to the same purpose 64. Concerning this Purgatory if wee consult with the places of the scripture alledged by them for the maintenance thereof wee shall find them either friuolously or falsly produced for either they are allegories which can affoord no strong conclusion in reasoning or they are vtterly of another sense except they bee wrung and stretched beyond their â—ether which to bee true may appeare First because none of them directly say that there is a Purgatory secondly the consequence extracted from theÌ„ is of so ambiguous an Interpretation that if one interpreter conceiue them that way two are of a contrary iudgment thirdly because they crosse one another in the Interpretation of them as for example Bellarmine obiects Mat. 5. 25. which Iansenius interprets cleane in another sense so Mat. 5. 22. produced by Bellarmine is confuted by Suarez and Maldonate so 1. Cor. 3. 2. is not vnderstood of Purgatory by Pererius and so of all the rest now how can an article of faith bee built out of these texts when neither the words themselues doe plainly affirme it nor by necessary consequence either in the opinion of Fathers or ioynt iudgement of their owne Doctours it can bee deduced from them and thus there is no fewell for this fire to bee found in Scripture diuine 65. Touching Councils it is to be noted first that the ancientest Councill which is alledged for the proofe hereof is the third Councill of Carthage which was about the yeere 398. Secondly the most of them speake not of Purgatory but of prayer for the dead which might bee done and was done without any conceit of Purgatory for they prayed for them of whose present possession of Heauen they doubted not as hath beene shewed before Thirdly that the first Councils alledged to mention Purgatory and decree it for a doctrine of faith were the Laterane vnder Innocent the third the Floreâ—tine vnder Eugenius the fourth and the Tridentine vnder Pius the fourth in the yeere 1563. and this sheweth directly and from their own confession that it is an article of no great antiquity 66. Lastly concerning the Fathers it cannot bee denyed but that many of them speake of a purging fire but it is to be obserued in them that they most of them intended not the Romish Purgatory but the fire of the day of Doome as the testimonies of Basill Ambrose Hilary Origen Lactantius and Ierome all alledged by Bellarmine doe euince if wee will either examine them by the contexts of the places themselues or giue credit to their owne Doctors so expounding them or to Bellarmine himselfe who in diuers places crosseth himselfe and yeeldeth asmuch as wee auouch Besides it is to bee obserued that many of the Fathers supposed that the Saints departed did neither receiue reward nor punishment till the last day but were kept in certaine hidden receptacles till that time and therefore they could not dreame of Purgatory which is an intermediall punishment ending at the day of iudgement Of this opinion were Irenaeus Iustine Martyr Tertullian Origen Lactantius Clements many others of the greatest ancients Againe it is to bee obserued that Augustine whom they challenge for the greatest patrone of this fire yet defineth nothing determinately of it but speaketh doubtingly and problematically and if he affirme it in
some one place he leaueth it in suspense in others and vtterly denyeth it in a third as for example in his Enchiriden he speaketh thus waueringly Such a thing is not incredible to bee after this life but whether it be or no it may be doubted and in a sermon hee seemeth vtterly to deny it when hee sayth There are two places and there is not a third we are ignorant of a third yea we finde in the Scripture that there is none such Againe it is to bee obserued that those Fathers which doe patronize this Purgatory yet propound it not as an article of faith but as a free opinion to bee receiued or contradicted as men thought good or saw reason and these also were none of the most ancient For Bellarmine climmeth no higher for it then to Athanasius Basill and Gregory Nazianzene for as for Dyonisius all knew him to bee a counterfeit but those liued after the age of the Primitiue Church as for those Fathers which liued in those purer times there is not a sillable found in them for the defence thereof Lastly it is not to bee forgotten that their owne Roffensis doth auerre that whoseeuer shall read the Greeke Fathers shall finde none or very rare mention of Purgatory and that all the Latine Fathers did not at the first apprehend it and that it was not a long time vniuersally beleeued in the Church but came in by little and little These things laide together doe demonstratiuely shew that Romish Purgatory was not an article of faith in the Primitiue Church but a late deuice brought in by a vaine feare and false and lying apparitions and maintained euer after by the smell of gaine and profit which â—accreweth thereby to the Popes purse and for the maintenance of his pompe and pride which otherwise would soone fall to the ground 67. Lastly to tye vp for breuities sake many points in one bundle prayer for the dead as it is vsed in the Church of Rome hath no ground of antiquity For though it cannot be denyed but that it hath beene an ancient custome in the Church and frequently vsed by the ancient Farthers yet their manner of praying was not of that nature as it is now in the Romish Synagogue For first the Ancients prayed for those whom they were perswaded to bee already in blisse as hath beene formerly declared but the Romanists say that such prayers are auaileable onely for soules tormented in the fire of Purgatory and that wee may not pray either for the blessed or the damned Secondly many of the Ancients suppose that all soules were reserued in a certaine secret place from the presence of God which they called Abrahams bosome Paradise the port of security the outward court of Heauen c. And therefore could not pray for their deliuerance from Purgatory as the Romanists doe Thirdly when the Ancients did pray for the Saints departed they did it as Bellarmine confesseth not in regard of any misery wherein their soules were but for the glorifying of their bodies in the day of the generall resurrection but the Romish prayers are onely for those that are in paines that they might bee deliuered Lastly the Ancients speake of the matter doubtfully as Saint Augustine with a peraduenture and as of a laudable custome receiued in the Church but not as a doctrine of absolute necessity but the Romanists obtrude it as an article of faith and call them Heretikes that deny the same and therefore though in generall prayer for the dead bee ancient yet Romish prayer is an Innouation declining from antiquity both in the obiect and subiect manner and end 68. So auricular confession is of like nature with the former For we confesse that confession was ancient but Auricular Romish confession is but a late vpstart both in respect of the absolute necessity of it which was brought in by Pope Innocent the third beeing before accounted but onely profitable and not necessary as in the Councill of Cabilon secondly in respect of the priuatenesse for Maldonate a Iesuite confesseth that for a long time in the Primitine Church there was none but publike confession thirdly in respect of the exact enumeration of all finnes with the circumstances which implyeth an impossibility for their owne Rhenanus confesseth that this is a deuterosis or late inuention of the Schoolemen neither indeed can a patterne bee giuen of it in all antiquity And lastly in respect of the merite which by the Church of Rome iâ— ascribed to the very act done thereof of which there is not the least mention in any of the Ancients In a word what need wee seeke further seeing wee haue the free confession of their Glosse vpon Gratian who affirmeth that this auriculaer confession is more truely saide to haue beene ordained by a tradition of the Church then by any authority either of the old or new Testament 69. So the exact number of seuen Sacraments which is an article of the Trentish Creede fortifyed with the greatest curse against all that shall say that there are either more or fewer is indirectly confessed to bee a nouelty by the Iesuite Suarez for hee sayth that the Council of Florence did but insinuate this truth and the Councill of Trent did expressely define it by which it is euident that it was but an insinuation in the Councill of Florence and no article of faith till the Councill of Trent and therefore an Innouation And directly by Cassander who sayth that vntill the dayes of Peter Lumbard wee shall scarce finde any author who set downe a certaine and definite number of Sacraments and to put the matter out of doubt it is confessed that this truth as they call it is not found in the Scripture but founded vpon Ecclesiasticall tradition And although Bellarmine laboureth to prooue out of Scripture them seuen none els to be properly Sacraments yet it is with as euill successe as Tyrabosco the Patriarke of Venice did extract the iust number of seuen from the miracle of fiue loaues and two fishes For first his owne Pew-fellowes disclaime some one some another of them as Durand doth Matrimony to bee properly a Sacrament because it hath not the vertue of conferring grace and Bonauenture extreame vnction to bee instituted by Christ and Aleusis and Holâ—ot did the like touching confirmation and also because his proofes are so friuolous oftentimes that a recitation of them is a sufficient refutation as for example to prooue that there is a promise of sauing grace in the conferring of orders he alledgeth 1. Tim. 4. 14. and 2. Tim. 1. 6. where Timothy is charged and admonished not to neglect but to stir vp the grace that was in him which was giuen to him by prophecy with the imposition of hands of the Eldership Here indeed is grace giuen to Timothy at his ordination but first it could not bee sauing grace because hee was before that conuerted and beleeued
expounded the Scriptures as their owne Doctors confesse Canus saying that they spake with a humane spirit and erred sometimes in things which afterward haue appeared to appertaine to the faith and Posseuine that there are some things in the Fathers wherein vnwitingly they dissented from the Church either therefore they must tax them with infidelity aswell as vs or cleare vs aswell as them if al the force of the argument hang vpon this pin that therefore wee are Infidels because we priuatly expound the Scriptures 32. To the second viz. that all vnlearned Protestants are Infidels because they rely their faith vpon the credit of the translatours I answere three things first that they doe not rely their faith vpon the credit and fidelity of any translatour but partly vpon the iudgement and authority of the Church which receiueth such translations and alloweth them and is able to iudge of them and partly and principally vpon the word translated which containeth such holy and heauenly doctrine as none that readeth or heareth it can chuse but acknowledge the Maiestie of Gods Spirit speaking in it 33. Secondly if our people are therefore Infidels because they cannot examine the translations by the Hebrew and Greeke and doe therefore rely their faith vpon the translatours credit then Augustine was an infidell who knew neither of these languages but was as it is written of him monoglossos and then many godly Doctours and Fathers of the Church were Infidels who for the most part were all ignorant of the Hebrew tongue and some of them of the Greeke also and lastly then all the godly Christians in the purer times who both read and heard the Scriptures translated into their mother tongues were infidels for they all relyed their faith vpon the word translated but not for the translators sake who might erre in translating many places but for the sound holy and heauenly doctrine therein contayned 34. Thirdly if this maketh men infidels to relye their faith vpon man then the ignorant Romanists must needs be all infidels whose implicite Colliarlike faith is grounded onely vpon the Church that is not onely vpon the Pope who is in power the whole Church but also vpon euery ordinary Pastor be he Iesuite or Priest or Frier or any other whom they are according to their diuinity bound in conscience to beleeue whatsoeuer they teach as hath been shewed now this is to rely their faith vpon the fidelity and credit of man and therfore the blame of infidelity falleth vpon them more iustly then vpon vs and thus this accusation of theirs that we haue no faith no religion no God no Christ but are plain Infidels is a most notorious and open slander 35. Thus generally they slander our religion and the professors thereof but not content therewith they set vpon particular persons and those that are most eminent in our Church either in authority of place or excellency of learning that like Captaines march in the head of the ranks For to omit their horrible raylings against Kings Princes Magistrates Nobles and men of high place that any wayes opposed themselues to the Romish Monarchie whose glorious vertues were so resplendent that the mist of their slanders cannot darken the lustre thereof Lord how they raue and rage against the ashes of Luther Oecolampadius Zwinglius Caluin Beza and other worthie champions of our Church O◠Luther they write that he was an Apostate Friar that through enuy pride and ambition fell from them because the office of publishing Indulgences was taken from the Monks of his order and translated vnto the preaching Friers and that he had conference with the Diuell about the priuate Masse and was taught by him that it was vnlawfull and that in a disputation at 〈…〉 psia he vttered these blasphemous speeches This cause was neither begun for God nor shall be ended for God and that his life was incestuous and he himselfe a notable wine-bibber and his death infamous and fearefull he going to bed merry and drunke and being found the next morning dead his body being black and his tongue hanging forth as if he had been strangled and that after his death his body so stanke that they could not endure to carry it to his graue but threw it in a ditch and that the Deulls departed from many that were possessed and came to his sunerall These and many other strange fictions they haue set vpon the stage for the disgracing of the life death and memory of that blessed instrument of God 36. For Caluin they report that he was branded on the back by the Magistrate for his Sodomiticall and brutish lust and that he dyed in despaire calling vpon the Diuell swearing cursing and blaspheming most miserably being possessed with the lousie disease and wormes so increasing in an impostume or most stinking vicer about his priuy members that none of the standers by could any longer indure his stinke The like slander they lay vpon the life of Beza who they say in his youth was an effeminate wanton luxurious Poet and deserued as much shame for his filthy life as Caluin had done Zwinglius was slaine say they by Gods iust iudgement in the warre against the Catholicks Oecolampadius dyed suddenly in the night and Carolastadius was murthered by the Deuill 37. Further they tell how Luther went about in vaine to restore to life one Mesenus that was drowned by whispering and murmuring in his eare and how he would haue cast out the Deuill out of a certaine mayd but was in danger to be slayne by him and how Caluin compacted with one Bruleus to fayne himselfe to be dead that to shew the lawfulnesse of his extraordinary calling he might miraculously rayse him to life againe and that he prooued dead indeed and deceiued his expectation and made him a knowne impostor Thus they belch forth their venome against these good men that through their sides they might wound the Gospell and truth which they professed but with what likelyhood of truth I pray you marke and iudge and because matters of fact can be prooued by no other euidence but by witnesse except God miraculously discouer them to the world and witnesses also must be impartiall and without exception or else their testimonie is of no moment let vs therefore compare those that speake for them with these that are against them and try whether deserue most credit 38. Sleidan writeth of Luther that his death was most sweet and comfortable full of heauenly prayers and godly exhortations at which were present the Earle of Mansfield and other Noblemen Iustus Ionas the Schoolemaister of his children Michael Caeleus Iohannes Aurifaber and many more who testified the same to be true and Erasmus reporteth of his life that it was approoued with great consent of all men and that the integritie of his manners was such that his very enemies could finde nothing in him that they might calumniate which
assertion that God can not make those things that bee done to be vndone doth not destroy but build vp the omnipotency of God seing as Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth Facere contradictoria non est efficere sed deficere to doe things contradictorie is not to effect and doe but to faile and vndoe and therefore an argument of impotency rather then of omnipotency and for that cause Pererius another Iesuite auoucheth the same doctrine with vs in these words God is said to be omnipotent not onely because he can do whatsoeuer is contained in the world but also because nothing is impossible vnto him except that which to be done implieth contradiction what an impudent flander then is this to say that wee deny Gods omnipotency by affirming that hee cannot make that to bee vndone which is done especially seeing wee say further with Tertullian and Saint Augustine that therefore God cannot do it because he will not do it he cannot therefore deny himselfe not make that to be vndone which is done because hee will not and he will not because it would rather be an argument of weakenes then a power in him so to doe 76. Againe they challenge Caluine of denying the immortality of the soule And why thinke you Because they would make him to say that the soules of the iust are kept in certaine secret receptacles till the day of Iudgement and doe not till then inioy the presence of God Another palpable slander for first Caluine doth not say so secondly if hee did yet it doth not follow thereupon that hee denyeth the immortality of the soule for the first let Caluine first speake for himselfe and then let his aduersaries also speak for him Touching the place where the soules of the iust remaine after death he affirmeth plainely in diuers places that they liue with God and enioy the happy felicity of his kingdome though their perfect happinesse is deferred till the second comming of Christ when their bodies and soules shal be re-united and made partakers of the same blessednes This he testifieth not in one or two but in many places how therefore can they lay to his charge that opinion touching secret receptacles where soules are reserued till the day of the resurrection 77. Mary sayth Bellarmine in two respects first because he maketh Christ alone to haue entred into the Sanctuary of heauen and there to present the prayers of the people resting in the vtter court to God secondly because he sayth that the Saints departed are ioyned together with vs by faith therefore sayth Bellarmine He must needs deny that they see God seeing where faith is there is not sight But his conclusion in both is false though the premises be true for as the Atrium or vtter Court of the Temple to which Caluine alludeth was a part of the Temple so by proportion the vtter Court of Heauen is a part of Heauen witnesse their owne Ribera expounding that place of Exodus whereunto Caluine alludeth and therefore Caluine if hee did say so doth not banish the iust soules out of Heauen but onely placeth Christ our high Priest betwixt God and them But what if hee speake onely of the Saints liuing and not departed and meane by the vtter Court not any part of Heauen but the Church militant heere on earth If this be true what shamelesse slaunderers are these fellowes to wring a sense out of Caluine whereof there is no show in the words let the place be consulted and viewed and their malice and impudency will appeare most notorious 78. Againe that faith which hee speaketh of in the second place is nothing else but their stedfast beliefe and expectation of the resurrection of their bodies which liueth in the faithfull soules separated from this mortality vntill the full accomplishment of their happinesse aswell as in the Saints militant neither can I conceiue any absurdity in this that the Saints departed should haue faith in this respect seeing they must needs haue hope which two Theologicall vertues are so perplexed together that one cannot bee without the other and therefore Clemens Alexandrinus calleth hope the blood of faith and Saint Paul sayth 1. Cor. 13. that faith and hope shall cease together when charity shall suruiue and remaine If then the Saints departed hope for the resurrection of their bodies why may they not bee said also to beleeue it and yet for all that be in heauen too 79. Neither is the other place obiected out of Caluine by Bellarmine any whit repugnant to this doctrine for though he sayth that it is a foolish and rash part to dispute curiously what the place is that the Saints possesse in Heauen and whether they inioy the full ioyes of heauen or no yet in the very same place hee affirmeth that they are in the presence of Christ in Paradise and that they onely expect the fruition of that promised glory which their bodies also shal be possessors of at the comming of Christ 80. Thus we haue heard Caluine speake for himselfe Let vs now heare his enemies speaking for him in this case then which there cannot be a stronger argument of his innocency and in this two may stand for all Bellarmine is the first hee directly confesseth that Caluine placed the soules of the Saints in heauen euen before the comming of Christ and to him subscribeth Fenardentius another Iesuite who affirmeth that this was Caluines opinion that the faithfull when they should depart out of this world doe behold God neere vnto them and as it were set before their eyes And thus Caluine is quit from this enditement by the witnesse of his profest aduersaries 81. Secondly let it be granted which neuerthelesse can no wayes be prooued that Caluine held this opinion touching the residence of soules in some secret place yet it doth not follow that therefore he denyed the immortality of the soule For then Origen Iustine Martyr Tertullian Irenaeus Lactantius Victorinus Chrysostome Theodoret Theophilact Ambrose Bernard and diuers others of the ancient godly Fathers should be enwrapped within the same errour who all held that opinion touching soules departed and yet were as farre from gain-saying or once imagining any opposition to the soules immortality as these backbiting Shemiâ—s are from charity and truth 82. Another lowde and lewde slander of theirs against our Religion is that it maintaineth and warranteth rebellion and disobedience against lawfull Princes Which if they could prooue wee would confesse that our Religion was naught seeing Gods word commandeth euery soule to be subiect to the higher powers but yet not worse then theirs which is without all contradiction guilty of this crime which they impute vnto vs as hath beene prooued but let vs heare their proofes they are of two sorts first from the doctrines of some of our learned writers and secondly from the practice of our professors In the first kind they obiect Caluine Beza Luther Knox Buchanan
they done it to gaine any thing thereby in disputation but onely to keepe the common people from infection whereas they spare none neither Fathers nor Councels nor moderne Writers and that not so much lest the common sort should bee infected as that the learned might be depriued of those weapons wherewith they might fight against them and wound their cause Seeing the case now so stands that hee which can muster vp together the greatest armie of Authours to fight vnder his colours is thought to haue the best cause their dealing then with vs is like that of the Philistims against the Israelites who despoyled them of all weapons and instruments of warre that they might dominiere ouer them with greater securitie but ours is not so towards them And therefore both in this and all the former respects it is a miserable vntruth and a desperate cuasion to say that wee are more guiltie of this crime then they are 107. Lastly whereas in his first answere hee pleadeth the lawfulnesse of the fact let vs heare his reasons to moue thereunto and in the interim remember that in prouing it to bee lawfull hee confesseth it to bee done But why is it lawfull Mary first because the Church being supreme Iudge on earth of all Controuersies touching faith and Religion hath authoritie to condemne Heretikes And therefore also the workes of Heretikes and if this then much more to correct and purge their Bookes if by that meanes shee can make them profitable for her vse and beneficiall to her children To which I answere two things First that it is not the Church that doth this but the sacred Inquisitors to wit certaine Cardinals and Lawyers deputed to that office who for the most part are so farre from being the Church that they are often no sound members thereof Iâ— it be said that they haue their authoritie from the Pope who is vertually the whole Church why doe they then speake so darkly and say the Church hath this authoritie when as they might in plaine termes say that the Pope hath it but that hereby they should display the feeblenesse of their cause and the fillinesse of this reason for thus it would stand Why is it lawful for Books to be purged because the Pope thinkes it lawful And must not he needs think so when the Authors crosse his triple crowne and speake against his state and dignitie Adde hereunto that it is a fallacie in reasoning when that is taken for granted which is in question For we deny their Synagogue to be the true Church and much more the Pope to bee the supreme Iudge and therefore till those things be proued the reason is of no effect 108. Secondly most of those things which are purged by them are so farre from being heresies or errours that they are the most of them sound doctrines of faith grounded vpon the authoritie of Gods sacred truth for they blot out many things in both olde and new Authours that they themselues dare not accuse to bee hereticall as that place in Saint Cyril before mentioned touching the power of faith which is no more in direct termes then that which is said in the Scripture Act. 15. 15. that faith purifieth the heart and that in the Basil Index of Chrysostome The Church is not built vpon a man but vpon faith and those propositions which are commanded by the Dutch Index to be wiped out of the Table of Robert Stephens Bible to wit that sinnes are remitted by beleeuing in Christ that he which beleeueth in Christ shall not die for euer that faith purifieth the heart that Christ is our righteousnes that no man is iust before God and that repentance is the gift of God with a number of like nature These they purge out of Stephens Index which notwithstanding are directly and in as many words recorded in the Booke of God and so it may iustly be thought that they are so farre from clenfing Bookes from the drosse and dregs of errour that they rather purge out the pure gold and cleare wine of truth and leaue nothing but dregs and drosse behind 109. His second reason is because nothing is more dangerous to infect true Christian hearts then bad Bookes Therefore it is not onely lawfull but needfull and behoouefull to the Church of God that such Bookes should bee purged and burned too if it bee so thought meete by the Church to the end that the sinceritie of one true faith and Religion might be preserued I answere all this is true which he saith but are they heresies which they purge no they are sound and orthodox opinions for the most part as hath beene proued in the answere to the former reason And doe they it to keepe Christian men from infection no their chiefe end and drift is to depriue their aduersaries of all authorities that make against them that so they might triumph in the antiquitie of their Religion and noueltie of ours which is one of their principall arguments which they vse though with euill successe for defence of their cause dealing herein as Holofernes did with the Israelites at the siege of Bethulia breaking the Conduits cutting the pipes and slopping the passages which might bring vs prouision of good and wholsome waters out of the cisternes of olde and new Writers this is their purpose and no other whatsoeuer they pretend for if they meant any good to Gods people for preuenting of infection they would haue purged their lying Legends of infinite fables their Canon Law of horrible blasphemies and their Schoolemen of many strange opinions Yea they would haue condemned the Bookes of Machiauel and of that Cardinall that wrote in commendation of the vnnaturall sinne of Sodomie and a number such like filthy and deuillish Writings which are printed and reprinted among them without controulement And againe is it vnitie in the true faith and religion that they seeke no it is conspiracie in falshood and consent in errour and not vnitie in the truth till the Romish Religion bee proued to bee the true Religion which can neuer be this reason is of no force to iustifie their proceedings Lastly is it Christian policy no it is deuilish subtletie and craftie forgerie for the case so stands betwixt them and vs as in a tryall of land betwixt partie and partie wherein hee that bringeth best euidence and witnesse carrieth the cause now if one partie either suborne false witnesses or corrupt true or forge euidences to his purpose or falsifie those that are extant all men will count him as a forger and his cause desperate and iudge him worthie the Pillorie so betwixt vs the question is who hath the right faith and the best title to the Church Our euidences are first and principally Gods Word then the writings and records of godly men in all ages now then they that shall purge pare raze blurr falsify or corrupt any of these must needs bee thought to bee subtle and craftie companions and not honest
betweene God and his Church and is if not in malignitie aboue heresie yet heresie in the highest degree for it robbeth God not onely of his glorie but of his essence and lifteth vp another into his throne but our sinne if it bee a sinne is at the highest euen in the reputation of their slander but heresie and that in the lowest degree consisting in matter of circumstance touching the worship of the creature and not in any fundamentall point of Religion that concerneth the Deitie Now whether conscience should bee more afraid of this or of that I thinke no man doubteth that hath a conscience 19. Fourthly we are sure that we cannot inuocate any but the true God for our Prayers are made vnto the blessed Trinitie and to none other But they are in danger to pray vnto false Saints in stead of true yea vnto those that eyther neuer were in rerum natura or that are in hell for the being of many of their Saints is grounded vpon their Legends and humane Stories which were subiect to lying erronious deceit the sainting of many that are inrowled in that Kalēder dependeth vpō the Popes canonization which they themselues cannot deny but is subiect to errour in so much that Caietane a learned and famous Romanist is reproued by Catharinus another of the same stampe for calling in question the pretended miracles for the Virgin Maries conception saying That if one Saint be doubted of the rest also may bee doubted of and therefore that no man can inuocate or worship them without manifest perill of Idolatrie Now many of their Saints may bee iustly doubted of if not worthily reiected Saint Augustines saying being notorious that many that are tormented in hell with the Deuill are worshipped by men in earth Therefore their inuocation must needs be dangerous 20. Lastly that God heareth our prayers no man doubteth but how the Saints heare them whether by the declaration of Angels or reuelation of God or in the glasse of the Trinitie they themselues are not able to determine what wise man now will relye his faith vpon such vncertainties and not choose rather to make his prayers to God who wee are assured heareth them and knoweth the heart rather then to them of whose knowledge and presence wee haue iust cause to doubt 21. The worship of Images and relickes doth plunge the practisers thereof into many apparent dangers which the refusers cannot fall into As first in shew at least they cannot but be iudged breakers of the second Commandement which forbiddeth the worship of any Image of whatsoeuer is in heauē earth or Sea that is in the whole world but they worship many and diuers Images of all sorts therefore in shew must needs be transgressors of the second Commandement Neyther can they rid thēselues frō this crime but by new deuised distinctions of latria and dulia I doll and Image the one being of Heathen gods the other of Christian Saints And in a word some of them are driuen to say that this Commandement was no part of the morall Law but a mere ceremoniall precept pertaining onely to the Iewish Church as hath beene shewne before vpon what quicklands and shelfes are they driuen that cannot cleare themselues from Idolatrie but by such desperate distinctions which haue no foundation in the word of God the Commandement prohibiteth all worship of any Image yea of the Creator himselfe and all his creatures they come with their niceties of distinctions and would make vs beleeue that not all worship but that onely which is called latria is forbidden nor all Images but the Idols of the Heathen that is of such things as neuer were nor to all people but the Iewes onely I am sure we in shew at least and in verie deed in truth doe giue more reuerence to this Commandement for plainly and directly without distinguishing diminishing altering or any wayes wringing the precept wee condemne all worship of all Images in all people whatsoeuer as impious and Idolatrous so that wee are in no dapger of transgressing this Commandement as they are if their distinctions helpe them not out 22. This danger is in respect of God another followeth in respect of conscience The Paynims worshipped stockes stones that is dead and liuelesse things as both the Prophet Esay and the Prophet Dauid doe plainly auouch Now doe not the Romanists the like for let it bee granted that their Images and those of the Heathen differ essentially and that in truth our Romanists worshippe not simply stockes and stones but the things represented by them yet this cannot bee denyed but that in outward appearance their worshippe hath great resemblance to that of the Heathen For when they fall downe before the crosse and say All haile O Crosse our onely hope c. as it is in their Masse Booke and Thou onely art worthy to beare the ransome of the World what doe they but at least in shew worship a stocke and a liuelesse thing as the Paynims did and when they say they worshippe not the thing it selfe but the thing represented by the Image as in the Crosse Christ that was crucified on the Crosse what do they but excuse themselues by the same reason which the Panims did for Seneca sayth that by Iupiter standing in the Capitoll with lightning in his hand they vnderstood the preseruer and gouernour of all things and Peresius a learned Papist affirmeth that few or none among the Gentiles thought their Idols to be Gods yea Saint Paul himselfe telleth vs that the Altar at Athens was dedicated to the same God that Paul preached though vnknowne vnto them So that in the matter itselfe and in the manner of excuse they are without all doubt cousen-Germanes to the Paynims and if they bee not in the gulfe of their Idolatrie yet they confine verie neere vpon the Coasts thereof whereas wee more wisely march aloofe and are afraid to approch any whit neere vnto them This I speake by way of supposition if their Image-worship bee not the same with the Paynims but if it be as it is indeed as hath beene proued before then with the heedlessefish they are leaped out of the frying pan into the fire they are not any longer in the danger but in the mischiefe it selfe let them choose which of these they will one they must needs fall into 23. Thirdly if wee respect charitie this doctrine is in danger to breake the cords thereof by giuing a double offence one to their owne silly ignorant seduced people for they not being able to distinguish of their schoole distinctions latria and dulia proper and improper worship nor to put a difference betwixt the Image and the samplar which it representeth and being warranted to fall downe before the Image doe ordinarily fall into Idolatrous worship which is so common and notorious a thing among the ruder sort that Polidore Virgil Cassander and Agrippa all profest patrones of
against their Emperours and that this was not for want of strength as Bellarmine would haue it he sayth that euen then they did not attempt any such thing when in number and strength they might make their party good but in this extolled their Religion aboue all other by defending this most holy doctrine That all men ought to obey the Magistrates The notable and learned Treatises of Barclay a French man Blackwell Warberton c. our Countrey-men all profest Romanists doe peremptorily and plainely by many reasons confute the same Touching his spirituall iurisdiction though there bee fewe of them that gain-say that yet Gregory the great one of their owne Popes may stand in stead of many who by many letters both to the Emperour and Bishop of Constantinople sheweth that no man ought to be an vniuersall Bishop ouer therest calling that name in detestation vaine proud prophane blasphemous mischieuous Antichristian against the commandements of God and decrees of Councils and peremptorily sayth that he is a follower of Sathan and a fore-runner of Antichrist that assumeth it to himselfe 59. And that the Pope is not the supreme Iudge in the Church nor of infallible iudgement but the Scripture only many of them are of opinion aswell as we Aquinas saith that the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles is the rule of our vnderstanding Antoninus saith that God hath spoken but once and that in the holy Scripture and that so plentifully to meet with all temptations and all cases that may fall out Gerson saith that the Scripture is the rule of our faith which being well vnderstood no authority of men is to be admitted against it Gonradus Clingius saith that the Scripture is the infallible rule of truth yea the measure and Iudge of the truth Peresius saith that the authority of no Saint is of infallible truth for that honour is due only to the Scripture Yea Bellarmine their Ring-leader confesseth the Scripture to be the most certaine and most safe rule of faith Franciscus Victoria saith that the Pope in dispensing against the Decrees Councels and former Popes may erre and grieuously sinne Alphonsus de Castro diueth deeper and saith that euery man yea the Pope and that as he is Pope and Pastor of the Church may be deceiued Bozius pierceth yet deeper and saith that the Pope may be an Heretike yea write teach and preach heresie And lastly Almayne saith that the power of not erring in the faith is not alway in the Pope Are not all these now Protestants in this point But for fuller satisfaction in this point I referre the Reader to the reuerent and iudicious Deane of Winchester Doctor Morton with others who haue largely and learnedly discouered this matter in their writings 60. The like might bee shewne in all other points these few instances therefore shall suffice for this time to perswade that it is farre more safe to subscribe to the Religion of Protestants then of Romanists seeing we hold nothing which many of their owne ranke and order doe not maintayne aswell as we and what I pray you could mooue them thus to doe being sworne subiects to the Church of Rome but the euidence of truth which shined so cleerely to their consciences that they neither could nor durst gaine-say the same Conclusion NOw then gentle Reader these things being thus cleerly proued viz First that the Religion of the Church of Rome giueth open libertie to sinne Secondly that it maintayneth by the grounds therof things forbidden by all lawes Diuine Naturall and Humane Thirdly that it imitateth the Iewes in those things wherein they are enemies to Christ Fourthly that it derogateth from the glorie of Gods mercy and efficacy of the merits of Christ in the worke of our redemption Fiftly that it refuseth to bee tryed by the Scriptures and will be iudged and tryed by none but it selfe Sixtly that it is at defiance and profest enmitie with the sacred Scriptures Seuenthly that it maintayneth grosse and palpable Idolatrie Eightly that it is contrary to it selfe by manifest contradictions Ninthly that it is apparently opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ Tenthly that it nourisheth grosse and barbarous ignorance amongst the people Eleuenthly that it was neuer knowne nor heard of in the Apostles time nor in the primitiue Church Twelfthly that it vpholdeth it selfe by vnlawfull vniust and vngodly meanes and lastly that it is dangerous and vnsafe both in respect of Gods glorie mans conscience and Christian charitie I say all these things being thus cleerely demonstrated what remayneth but that wee abhorre the same as the Religion of the great Whore and her Paramour Antichrist who with their cup of fornications and vaine pretext of Peters authoritie haue besotted heretofore all Nations of the earth and cleaue to the sinceritie of the Gospell taught and professed in the Church of Protestants which is free from all these imputations for it neither giueth libertie to sinne nor maintayneth any thing that is vnlawfull nor imitateth the Iewes ascribeth all the worke of our redemption to Gods mercy and Christs merits onely desireth to bee tryed and examined by the Scriptures reuerenceth the fulnesse and perfection thereof abhorreth all shew of Idolatrie is not at enmity and opposition but keepeth a sweet harmony with it selfe doth not crosse the Gospell not so much as in shew condemneth and laboureth against ignorance is agreeable to the doctrine of the Apostles and primitiue Church maintayneth it selfe by no vnlawfull meanes and lastly hath great safetie and securitie in the profession thereof Good Christians must bee like good Gold-smiths who will not take a piece of gold of any mans word but will trie it by the touch-stone and weigh it in the ballance The Truth is like gold it behoueth all therefore to trie it and weigh it before they entertayne it into their soules lest they receiue in stead of pure mettall that which is counterfeit and light trie therefore these two Religions which of them hath the truth and without partialitie or affection retayne the good and reiect the counterfeit remember that the truth of Christians as Saint Augustine saith is more beautifull incomparably then Helene of the Grecians and that it alone as Saint Ambrose saith freeth alone saueth alone washeth and therefore though it be hid in a deepe pit as the Philosopher said yet it is diligently to be digged for of all them that desire the saluation of their soules In a word let not the darke mists of error and superstition blinde thine eyes but open them wide to the beholding of the bright light of truth that shineth round about thee and know that if the Gospell be hid it is hid to them that perish in whom the god of this world hath dazeled their mindes that they should not see the light of the glorious Gospell of Iesus Christ I desire no more credit at thy hands then the euidence of these reasons produced do require and therefore if they be true then
yeeld assent vnto them for thine owne soules sake if they be false declare for my soules sake wherein the falshood lurketh and I will be as ready to recant as thou to refute The Lord of his mercy anoint both our eyes with the eye-salue of his Spirit that we may see the truth and supply them with the oyle of his grace that we may bow and bend vnto it and strengthen vs with his diuine power that wee may constantly professe and perseuere in the same to our liues ends faxit Deus for his only begotten Sonne and our only blessed Sauiour Iesus Christs sake to whom bâ— all honour power maiestie preeminence and dominion for euer and euer AMEN Soli Dâ—â— vnitrinâ— sit laus in sempiternum FINIS To the Reader THus it happeneth 〈…〉 Reader by an ineuitable necessity where the Author cannot be presen 〈…〉 I pray thee these faults escapes and couer 〈…〉 of charity But if malice picke quarrell let it know that there is nothing alledged which in substance shall not bee iustified though per aduenture it may faile in circumstance Farewell ERRATA 〈…〉 twelue 〈…〉 p. 10 l. 33. Torelius r. recâ—lius p. 28. 35. or r. for p. 41. l. 37. them r. 〈…〉 r. conceptions p. 44. l. 17. Scotus r. Sotus p. 48. l. 3. venalia r. 〈…〉 2. 〈…〉 r. 〈…〉 p. 65. l. 7. candâ—labro r. candelabri p. 71. l. 15. Gregory the eleuenth 〈…〉 l. 17. Paul the second r. Sixtus quartus p. 78. l. 2. sound r. found p. 81. l. 3. 〈…〉 p. 88. l. 1â— fabulis r. tabulis p. 90. l. 34. operaturo r. operatur p. 98. l. 2. 〈…〉 l. 16. mâ—â—â—e r. more p. 121. l. 12. third r. fourth p. 148. l. 20 Church r. Iudge 〈…〉 r. guided p. 159. l. 31. scriptuarii r. scripturarii p. 167. l. 20 to be spoken Christ r. to be 〈…〉 Chrâ—st p. 183. l. 21. word r. words p. 192. l. 1. Moses r. noses p. 159. â— â—2 contraction r. contraâ—â—â—â—â— p. â—05 l. 12. Lusianus r. Lâ—cianus p. 207. l. 34. Eunimian r. Eunomian p. 211. l. 24. Paludamus r. 〈…〉 p. 221. l. 17. 18. make a full point after fancies and a comma after wants p. 224. l. 9. exaâ—â—â—â— r. exâ—men p. 225. l. 26. Apostophers r. Apostrophes p. 226. l. 30. Alexander Alensis the r. Alex. Alensis one of the. l. 37. effected r. affected p. â—37 l. 12. Carnians r. Cainians p. 238. l. 26. Paulae r. Pauâ—â— p. 242. l. 12. Marionites r. Marcionites p. 243. l. 9. that is r. that we must c. p. 250. l. 28. pulpate r. 〈◊〉 p. 252. l. 10. waiting r. washing p. 261. l. 2. sacrifizing r. sacrificâ—â— p. â—â—â— l. 12. former r. formaâ— p. â—â—â— â— â—4 first r. fiâ—t â— 282. l. 2. martyro r. martyros p. 294. l. 6. monothebit r. monothelit p. 296. l. â— proposâ—â—â—â— r. praeposition p. 298. l. 5. that first one r. that one p. 302. l. 18. Dominius r. Dominicus p. 314. l. â— yeâ—â— they p. 315. l. 2. â—â—â—lt the r. built vpon the. l. 16. truely r. true p. 319. l. r. primary r. primaciâ— p. 320. â— 9. with r. which p. 335. l. 22. beare r. beere l. 23. sinnes r. sinners p. 353. l. 29. of your r. of the. p. 354. l. 35. 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 p. 373. l. 13. decideth r. diuideth l. 28. CistereÌ„sians r. CisterceÌ„sians p. 377. l. 7. â—â—sâ—â—s r. â—esum p. 380. l. 22. one r. our p. 384. l. 19. but r. or p. 392. l. 12. Mortanus r. Montanus p. 393. l 23 â—â—â—â— r. for p. 409. l. 17. put in r. put it in p. 〈…〉 3â— Enchiriden r. 〈◊〉 p. â—â—â— l. 23. Hobrot r. Holcott p. 422. l. 〈…〉 Guimardine r. 〈◊〉 â—â— p. 427. l. 30. deuices r. decrees p. 434. l. 9. Bargency r. Baugency p. 447. l. â— Elipsia r. Lypsia p. 450. l. 2â—â— Mauclerus â— Nauclerus p. 452. l. 30. Reminia r. Remmia p. 466. l. 12. goods r. good l. 26. some direct â— for direct p. 478. l. 27. defiled r. defyed p. 486. l. 36. Iudices expurgatorii r. Indices expurgatorii Apoc. 9. 3. Virg. Eclog. 3. Ambros lib. 1. de poenit c. 13. Luther Doctorem Barlowum intelligo Archidiaconum Wintoniensem quem etiam honoris causa nomino Bozius lib. 12. de sig Eccles cap 12. Posseâ— lib. 1. Biblioth Iraen cont haeres lib. 4. c. 62. Nazian Apol. pag. 28. 1. Cor. 2. 16. Gal. 5. 15. I. Iraeneus lib. â— cap. 54. Reuel 17. 12. Ierem. 51. 9. 2. Thes 2. 10. 11 2. MAIOR Iames 1. 27. 2. Tim. 3. 1. Tit. 1. 1. Rom. 7. 11. Matt. 10. 34. MINOR I. Med. Christ paraen li. 7. ca. 17. Gratian part 1. pag. 76. Panorm extr de diuort c. fin Felyn de consist cap. statut can 1. Anton. paâ— 3. tit 22. cap. 6. Antonin part Siluest in verbo Papa pag. 279. Bartho fumus in verb. dispensat Angel de Claua in verbo papa Fumus quo supra Caietan in Leui. cap. 18. Nauarr. enchir pag. 515. Nauarr. Enchir pag. 515. Caietan in Leu. cap. 18. Rob. Gag in Ludâ—uic 12. Mich. Ritus l. 2. Decret dist 34. cap. 4. â—el de monach li. 2. ca. 30. Cent. Grauam grau 75. Espens de conti li. 2. cap. 7. in Tit. 1. Pet. Martyr loc com Azor. Instâ—tut mor. l. l. 5. c. 15. Idem li 11. c. 9. Glossa ad Decret li. 2. tit 24. cap. 10. Bonfin Decad. 3. lib. 6. Aeneas Siluius com in Europ Bell. de monach lib. 2. cap. 36. I â—uita Gicar Francisâ— Vâ—ct d potest pap concil Relect. â— pag. 139. Nichol. Clenang Ioh. Gers tom â— de potest Eccles consid 10. Ioh. Pic. Miran â—rat ad Leon. 10 2. Bel. de Indulgen lib. 1. ca. 2. Aquin. supl in 3. par q. 25. art â— Bonif. apud Plat. in vita Veg li. 13. c. 36. Tapper expl art Louan art 6. Fuâ—men brut ex bul Clem. 6. Antonin part 3. Tit. 22. c. 5. §. 6. Onuph Paâ—viâ— Recitare est refutare â—alaeus in vita Leonis 10. Muscul com loc tit minist Iohan. Monachuâ— Chemnit exam de poeniteat Onus Eccles ca. 15. fol. 26. 3. Coster enchir Rhen. Annot. ad Tertul. de poenit Eras Annot. ad Hieron de obitu Sabiâ—l Chrysost Homil. 22. ad popul Antioch Aluar. pelag Planet eccl lia art 27. De vanit c. 64. Socrat. li. 5. ca. 9. Sozom. li. 7. c. 16. Tripart l. 9. c. 35 Niceph. l. 12. c. 28 Andr. ortâ—o exp Baro. tom 1. art 56. â—u 28. Cost ench p. 387. Chem. exam Tri. de confess Panormitan Peresi Petrus Oxoniâ—n Roffens ep art 5. Maldon in Sum. q. 16. art 1. Suarez tom 4. desp 4. Sect. 4. Tollet lib. 3. de instruct sacr c. 5 Cost enchir de pâ—nit Col. 2. 23. 1. Tim. 4. 8. Câ—ster ench de sacram pâ—nit pag. 400. Suar. tom 4. disp 50. Sect 5. Cost dâ— Ind. c. Aquin. Sâ—plan 3. par q. 25. art 1. Tol t. li. 6. de instruct sac ca. 22.
Peters successor must be in the same case that is neither to erre personally nor iudicially or if he erre one way then also to bee subiect to error the other Lastly experience hath taught that Popes may erre euen as they are Popes and that iudicially yea and also haue beene condemned for Heretikes As Honorius the first whom three generall Councils condemned for a Meâ—othelâ—te And Iohn the two and twentieth who was constrained to recant his iudgement touching the soule by the Vniuersitie of Paris And Iohn the three and twentieth who was condemned for an Heretike by the Council of Constance for denying the immortality of the soule And diuers others who not onely in their priuate opinions but in their publike doctrines haue taught and maintained notorious errours 67. Another doctrine of theirs is that the Pope is the head of the Church and yet they denie not but sometimes the Pope is no true nor sound member of the Church how can hee be the head of the Church that is no sound member thereof nay no member at all not so much as the taile as the Iewish Rabbines call the Bishop of Rome in disdaine except their last distinction helpe them quatenus Papa and quatenus homo I know not how they will rid themselues out of this snare and yet that will not helpe them neither in this case for is it likely that Christ will make a reprobate the head of his Church and commit the cuâ—â—â—dy of the same to an Atheist an Heretike or an Epicure or a Necromancer or a monster of nature as all stories â—all Iohn 12. and as many of them haue beene Surely either as he is a Pope he is not the Churches head or as hee is a man hee must needs be a member of the same If they say that wee giue vnto a King the same title of head and gouernor of the Church who notwithstanding is often a tyrant and waster of the Church and a very reprobate I answere that in attributing these titles of dignity to Kings wee doe not positiuely set downe what euery one is for if hee bee a destroyer of the Church hee is not an vpholder of it but what euery one ought to bee in regard of his office but the Romanists absolutely set it downe that though the Pope be a wolfe wasting the flocke of Christ and though hee lead by his doctrine and example infinite soules with him to hell yet hee is still actually the head of the Church quatenus Papa and no man may say vnto him Why doe you so 68. Againe it was decreed by two Councils and those assembled authorized and confirmed by Popes themselues that the Councill was aboue the Pope and yet the Councill of Laterane vnder Pope Leo the tenth decreeth peremptorily that the Pope is aboue all Councils so also most of the moderne Romanists affirme Now if the decrees of Councils lawfully assembled and approoued by Popes bee the doctrines of the Church then here is one doctrine quite contrary to another one Councill opposite to another yea one Pope to another which is no new nor strange thing but ordinary in the Church of Rome As witnesse Pope Iohn the two and twentieth and Pope Nicholas about the question of our Sauiours manner of possessing earthly goods and Pope Celestine and Pope Innocent the third in the question of diuorce in the case of heresie and Pope Pelagius and Pope Gregory the first in the question of putting away the wiues of Subdeacons one of these crossing the other iudicially and one gain saying what the other defended And most notorious is that which diuers Chronologers testifie of Pope Stephen the sixt how hee decreed in a Councill that they who were ordained Bishops by Pope Forâ—â—sus his predecessour were not ordained lawfully because the man was wicked by whom they were ordained therfore he did vnordain them and reordaine them againe thus Stephen iudicially crossed Formâ—sus and hee againe was crossed and condemned by Pope Iohn the ninth euen for this fact and his new ordainings marched with new baptizings 69. Lastly they constantly maintaine that the Pope is not Antichrist and yet they affirme that hee is the Vicar of Christ heere on earth a flat contradiction for the word Antichrist signifieth not onely an enemie vnto Christ but also one that taketh vpon him the office and authority of Christ the prâ—position 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 affording naturally and properly both significations as appeareth in these two wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an opposite and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Proconsull in the first whereof it signifieth opposition and the second substitution Now then if the Pope bee Christs Vicar generall on earth then he is in the last sense Antichrist and beeing so in the last sense it is most likely that hee is also the same in the first because the Antichrist spoken of in the Scripture is described to be such a one as is not an open and outward but a couert and disguised enemie hauing two hornes like the Lambe that is counterfeting the humility and meeknesse of Christ and making a glorious profession of religion with a shew of counterfeit holinesse when notwithstanding hee speaketh lyes in hypocrisie and vttereth wordes like the dragon and is the greatest enemy to Christ Iesus and his Gospel that euer was so that in that hee is Christs Vicar hee is Antichrist by their owne confession in that sense and being so is probably Antichrist also in the other because the true Antichrist must bee both the one and the other And so for the conclusion of this point wee haue not onely the mystery of iniquity that is Antichristianisme in the manifold contradictions and oppositions thereof but euen Antichrist himselfe lurking in his den professing himselfe and his followers to bee the onely true Church of God and pretending himselfe to be the Prince of the couenant as Saint Ierome speaketh that is asmuch as to say the Vicar of Christ and without doubt as the sweet harmonie in Christian Religion and euery part thereof with it selfe is a pregnant argument of the infallible truth thereof so the miserable opposition and contrariety in the Religion of the Church of Rome and that most of the doctrines therein contained either with themselues or with other as I haue in part here shewed leauing a fuller demonstration thereof to some other that shal more deeply search into them doe euidently euince that it is the Religion of Antichrist and therefore not onely to be suspected but euen to bee abhorred of all them that loue the truth or that desire the saluation of their soules The IX MOTIVE That Religion whose doctrines are in many points apparently opposite to the word of God and the doctrine of the Gospell cannot bee the trueth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome ergo c. 1 IN the Chapter going before I haue shewed how the Romish Religion is contrary to it selfe
and ignorance must needs ouerflow the world as wofull experience hath taught to bee true in those places where the Romish Religion preuaileth 16. Thirdly they teach that Images and Pictures are Lay mens Bookes wherein they must read and with the which they must content themselues without searching at all into the Booke of God This doctrine taught Gulielmus Peraldus three hundred yeeres since saue that hee ioyned the Scripture and Images together for thus he writeth As the Scriptures be the Bookes of the Clergie so Images and the Scripture are the Bookes of Lay men where hee equalleth a dumbe and dead Picture to the speaking and liuely Scriptures the worke of man to the Word of God But Loelius Zechius a learned and famous Diuine of latter time goeth further and saith that Images are the onely Bookes for them that bee vnlearned to draw them to faith and knowledge and imitation of diuine matters Yea another Fryer that liueth in Paris at this day or at least was aliue very lately goeth yet a degree further and affirmeth that Lay men may more easily learne diuine mysteries by contemplation of Images then out of the Booke of God and all these are as they stile them most Catholike and holy Bookes But what should I search further into these petty Disciples whereas the grand Doctor himselfe hath this proposition in expresse words Meliùs interdum docet pictura quà m scriptura A Picture doth better instruct sometimes then the Scripture 16. This is their Doctrine Now what fruits doth it bring foorth Surely the best fruit is ignorance a worse then that error and the worst of all superstition and and idolatry for howsoeuer we deny not that there may be an historicall and ciuill vse of Pictures either to put vs in minde of our absent friends or to represent some obseruable history and notable deede done or to stirre vs vp to the imitation of the vertues of Godly men and women yet we constantly affirme that to make them the Bookes of Lay men either to be instructed by them alone without the Booke of God or to finde better and more perfect instruction in them then in it is to inwrap the people in a cloude of foggie and mistie ignorance and to hood-winke their eyes that they should not see the bright shining light of truth for where is all sound sauing knowledge to bee found but in the holy Scripture whither doth our Sauiour Christ send his Disciples but vnto them he doth not say vnto them Gaze vpon Pictures for they be they that testifie of me and In them yee shall finde eternall life but Search the Scriptures for c. And the Prophet Dauid that it is the Law of God that giueth wisedome vnto the simple and that conuerteth the soule and giueth light vnto the eyes and not the Pictures of Abraham Isaac and Iacob or of any of the Prophets And therefore though a man may be instructed by a Picture touching a thing done yet most certaine it is that more excellent and more perfect instruction is gotten by the Scripture for let an vnskilfull man returne neuer so often to the beholding of his Picture it will alwaies represent the same thing vnto him and if any scruple or doubt remaine in his minde it can answere nothing for the explication thereof whereas in holy Scripture that which is obscure in one place is explained in another and that which in one Chapter we cannot conceiue in the next following it may be is so cleerely set downe that a childe may discerne it without erring so that as a man may discouer his meaning by signes and becks yet it is not so effectuall as if he vtter it by word of mouth so Pictures may teach but yet Scripture teacheth more fully and effectually And therefore to tye the people to these dumbe Bookes and discharge them from searching into the Booke of God is to depriue them of the chiefest meanes of knowledge and so to foster them in ignorance 17. But yet this is not all For besides that it occasioneth ignorance an Image also is a teacher of lyes as the Prophet Habakuk calleth it and a mother and a nurse of superstition and Idolatry For first how many Pictures are there in their Churches of Monsters and miracles that neuer were As of Saint George killing the Dragon Saint Christopher carrying Christ vpon his shoulder ouer the Ford. Saint Catherine tormented vpon the wheele and disputing with the Philosopher Saint Dunstane holding the Diuell by the nose or lip with a paire of Pincers Saint Denis carrying his owne head in his hands being strooke off Saint Dominick burning the Deuils fingers with a Candle which hee made him to hold will he nill hee And an infinite number such like which either neuer were extant in the world or were not such neither euer did worke such feates as are represented by their Pictures Two Pictures I cannot passe ouer in silence which I haue seen and obserued with my owne eyes the one at the Church of Ramsey in Huntington-shire neere adioyning vnto that quondam a famous and rich Abbay In this Church in the lowest window in the right I le is a picture of a paire of Ballance in one skole whereof is the Deuill and in the other a woman and the woman is more sinfull then the Deuill ouerweighing him euen to the ground Behold a Lay mans book whereat wise men may wonder fooles may laugh and women may bee inraged and euery one may read the folly and prophanenes of those times Sure I am heere is little instruction for the soules health The other is in the Cloister window of the cathedrall Church of Peterborough where is painted out at large the history of Christs passion In one place whereof our Sauiour Christ sitteth with his twelue Apostles eating his last Passeouer which because it was vpon the Thursday night before Easter commonly called Maundey Thursday therefore they picture before him in a dish not a Lambe as the truth was but because it was Lent O miserable blindnesse three pickerels so that now the Paschall Lambe is turned into a Paschall pickerell and all forsooth to nourish in the people the superstition of the Lent fast For if they should see Christ eating flesh in Lent what an incouragement would this be thought they for the people to doe the like 18. And thus Images may wel be called Laymens bookes But what bookes you see euen such as teach lyes and superstition no sound and true instruction I could heere relate how that Saint Dunstane put life by a trunke forsooth into the Image of the Virgin Mary and made her speake against the marriage of Priests when that controuersie could no otherwise bee decided And how the Image of the Crucifixe vsed to speake to Saint Francis to the end to giue authority to the order of his fraternity and that vpon two Images in a Church at Venice the one of Saint
Dominick the other of Saint Paul were written these words On Pauls By this man you may come to Christ On Dominicks But by this man you may doe it easilier because Pauls doctrine led but to faith and the obseruation of the Commandements but Dominicks taught the obseruation of Councils which is the easier way All this and asmuch more might be produced to this purpose But I conclude the point with the censure and confession of their owne Cassander who out of the writings of William Bishop of Miniatum concludeth with him that as if officious lyes should bee added to the holy Scriptures there would remaine no authority nor weight in them So no errour nor falshood should be tolerated in Images and Pictures in the Church seeing that an errour not resisted is receiued for a trueth And in the same place the same Cassander doth bewaile the abuse of Images in the Church of Rome affirming that superstition was too much pampered thereby that Christians were nothing behind the Heathō in the extreme vanity of framing adorning and worshipping of Images Thus farre Cassander out of which we may perceiue the chiefe lessons that are learned out of these Lay bookes to wit ignorance superstition and Idolatry And therefore no maruaile if all these vices raigne in the midst of their Church as plentifully as amongst the Heathen themselues 19. Fourthly they deliuer for sound doctrine that whereas Saint Iohn sayth that they which haue the anointing of the holy Ghost know all things Hee meaneth not that euery one should haue all knowledge in himselfe personally but that euery one that is of that happy society to which Christ promised and gaue the holy Ghost is partaker of all other mens graces and gifts in the same holy Spirit to saluation And thus whereas Saint Iohn meaneth that euery true Christian both by the outward preaching of the word and by the inward vnction of the Spirit hath a distinct knowledge of all things necessary to saluation They say that it is sufficient if he be partaker of another mans knowledge though he be empty voyde himselfe Then which what can be a greater nourisher of ignorance and quencher of knowledge For if I may bee saued by anothers mans knowledge and faith And if it bee not required that I should know al things necessary to saluation in my owne person but may haue a share of another mans knowledge what need I greatly seeke for knowledge my selfe And why may I not repose the hope of my saluation vpon other men And heereby wee may obserue their grosse absurdity In the case of iustification they teach that wee are not made righteous by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs though hee bee the head of the body of the Church and the Spirit that animateth it proceedeth from him and yet heere they say that a man may be made wise and knowing by the knowledge of other their fellow members in the same body abiding in the vnity of Christs Church What is this but to aduance the members aboue the head or at least to forget themselues not caring what they say so that they maintaine the cause they haue in hand 20. I but Saint Augustine sayth If thou loue vnity for thee also hath he whosoeuer hath any thing in it it is thine which I haue it is mine which thou hast And againe in another place hee sayth When Peter wrought miracles he wrought them for me because I am in that body in which Peter wrought them In which body though the eye seeth and not the eare and the eare heareth and not the eye yet the eye heareth in the eare and the eare seeth in the eye c. Therefore all the grace and knowledge that is in any other of Gods Saints either liuing or dead is ours by participation And so that which was sufficient in them for their saluation is also enough for vs for ours though wee haue little or none of our owne Thus reason our Rhemists in the place before quoted But I answere first with our reuerend learned countrey-man Doctor Fulk that Saint Augustine vnderstandeth that place of Saint Iohn of an actuall and personall knowledge inspired by the holy Ghost concurring with the outward ministery of the Church and not of any generall knowledge infused into the Church to bee transfused and dispersed among the members by an imputatiue participation Secondly if a man may know by another mans knowledge why may not a man bee righteous by anothers righteousnesse And if the knowledge of our fellow members may bee imputed to vs that wee thereby may bee saide to know why may not the iustice of our head bee so imputed vnto vs that thereby wee may bee made iust These things are so paralell that the one being granted the other needs must follow Thirdly and lastly that communion which is betwixt the members of a body either naturall or mysticall is not an actuall translation of gifts from one to another but either a participation in the fruit of those gifts or a generating of the like in others by doctrine example exhortation prayers and such like meanes And so wee may truely say that euery one that is in the body of Christ reapeth fruit and benefit by all the graces and gifts that euer haue or shall belong to any member thereof though not for merit yet for comfort instruction edification and increase of grace And againe as one candle lighteth another and one steele sharpeneth and whetteth another So wisedome and grace is deriued from one to another either by naturall commerce of speech or patterne of example Thus much did Saint Augustine intend and no more and therefore it neuer came into his minde to thinke as these idle braines would make him that the knowledge which resided in the Saints of God is actually in all Gods Children or that they are partakers of their gifts and graces to their saluation For he that will be saued must beleeue for himselfe and know for himselfe and liue godly for himselfe If hee doe all these things by a proxy hee must also goe to Heauen by a proxy and not by himselfe This doctrine therefore is a manifest breeder and maintainer of such grosse ignorance as both Saint Augustine and all other holy men haue alwayes condemned for a sinne 21. A fift doctrine from whence ignorance springeth and ariseth is their prohibiting of Lay men to dispute touching matters of faith and that vnder paine of excommunication This Nauarre propoundeth as the doctrine of their Church neither is it contradicted by any other Aquinas goeth further and sayth that it is vnlawfull to dispute of matters of faith in the presence of those that are ignorant and simple And Bellarmine taketh away from the people all power of iudging of their Pastours doctrine saying that they must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach except they broach some new doctrin which hath not beene heard of in the Church before And if they