vs iustice wisedome sanctification and redemption and that Abraham beleeuing it was imputed to him for righteousnesse the Prophet Isaias cap. 53. sheweth that by his stripes wee are healed 9 They say that wee are iustified by the law and by the works there of but the Apostle Gal. 3. saith it is manifest that no man is iustified by the law before God and Rom. 4. he sheweth that Abraham was not iustified by the workes of the law doth it not then manifestly appeare that these false Apostles of Antichrist teach doctrine contrary to the Apostle and are not the children of Abraham or partakers of his faith 10 Thomas Aquinas 2.2 q. 4. art 3. teacheth that Christians are not bound to confesse their faith at all times and this his followers diligently practise that by their wicked teachers are taught to aequiuocate and dissemble their faith and profession but true Christians are alwaies boldly to professe their faith and to yeeld a reason of the same for this is the doctrine of the Apostle S. Peter whom wee are rather to credit than these false Apostles 11 For a lay man to dispute of matters of faith they count it mortall sinne especially knowing that the Pope hath forbid the same vnder paine of excommunication as Nauarrus teacheth enchirid c. 11. but this sheweth that Papists do rather seeke to suppresse the faith then to teach matters of faith the same also appeareth for that they commend ignorance and Thomas Aquinas 2.2 q. 2. art 6. saith that all are not bound to haue explicit faith Linwood in his glosse vpon the constitution beginning ignorantia de summa Trinit holdeth that it is sufficient for lay men and simple people to beleeue the articles of the Creede implicitely or to beleeue as the Catholicke Church beleeueth and this is the faith that Hosius commended in the colliar but it sheweth that our aduersaries seeke to intertaine the people in ignorance of matters of faith while the masse-priests sport and intertaine themselues with all delights and liuing idly reape the fruits of poore mens labours 12 Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 7. art 3. denieth that Christ hath faith which is as much as if hee should make Christ the authour of our faith a Pagan and an Infidell further the same ouerthroweth the Popish definition of faith for either Christ did not firmely beleeue Gods word or else he had faith now to say that is plaine blasphemy neither is that defence materiall that Christ knew all things by reason of the hypostaticall vnion of two natures in one person for that did not ouerthrow his humane nature nor hinder him for hauing faith without all imperfection Finally they teach that the Pope onely is to order and to publish the Creed for that is the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas 2. 2. q. 1. art 10. and the rest no question beleeue it but it is sufficient to ouerthrow not onely the Nicene and Constantinopolitan confession but also the Apostles Creede and faith of Christ for whatsoeuer face our aduersaries doe set on matters they shal neuer shew that these anciēt Creeds did either depend vpon the authority of the Pope or were by him ordered published or confirmed nay many Popes we read of which for any thing we can vnderstand did not beleeue the Apostles Creed vpon this weake foundation of infidel Popes the miserable Papists do build their wind-shaken faith wee doe not therefore maruell if they relie more vpon workes then this faith and if they trust rather to be iustified by good works than the Popes erroneous faith but if they would consider what true faith is and how the same applieth Christ vnto vs and vniteth vs vnto him then would they abandon the errors of Popery of which wee haue giuen a tast in this article of iustification by faith in Christ CHAP. V. What Papists doe meane by the Gospell THe preaching of the Gospell to Christians is the gladsome declaration of Gods fauour offred to vs through Christ Iesus and therefore the Angell Luc. 2. speaking of the Sauiour of the world declared that he brought them tidings of great ioy that should be to all people but the Papists by their new and strange doctrine do so confound the law and the gospell as if they sought to depriue Christians of this ioy and meant to alter the title of Christs most ioifull Gospell for first as if Christ had not beene a Sauiour or a Redeemer but a lawgiuer that was to propound a new law wherewith Christians were to bee newly charged they call the Gospell the new law but neither is the law of Moses contained in the two tables abolished nor was it Christs intention to surcharge his people with new lawes and new bonds but to free them from the curse of the law and to redeeme them as for the orders concerning sacraments we may not repute them to be properly lawes but meanes and directions for the right applying of Gods graces vnto Christians further the new law that God speaketh of was written in mens harts as wee read Hierem. 31. and Heb. 8. but the lawes of the new Testament which the Papists speake of are partly written in scriptures and partly in decretales the Papists therefore making Christ a new lawgiuer doe ouerthrow his couenant of grace Secondly this new Law or Testament as they say is the loue of God shed into our hartes for so doth Bellarmine teach lib. 1. de verb. dei c. 3. but grant this and then the new testament doth not include remission of sinnes for loue is one thing and remission of sinnes another but that the new testament doth include remission of sinnes first our Sauior doth signifie where he calleth the cup of thankesgiuing the cup of the new testament for remission of sinnes and Chrysostome in 2. Cor. 3. and Theodoret Oecumenius and Theophylact vpon the same place directly affirme Thirdly Thomas Aquinas 1.2 q. 107. art 4. saith that the preceptes of the new law or of the Gospel as touching the inward workes of vertue are more grieuous then the precepts of the law of Moyses quantum ad opera virtutum saith he in actibus interioribus c. praeceptanouae legis sunt grauiora this is directly contrary to the words of our Sauiour Math 11. my yoke saith he is easie and my burden light furthermore the same maketh the Gospell not to be a doctrine of Christian liberty and redemption but of bondage and greeuance Fourthly the censurers of Collein fol. 204. say that this is the proper doctrine of the Gospell if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandements and with them in effect doth Bellarmine lib. 1. de verb. dei c. 3. consent where he saith that the new testament is nothing but Charity shed into our harts by the holy Ghost but this confoundeth the law and the Gospell for no man can deny but that Charity is required by the law further the same is contrary to the doctrine of the Apostles the law saith
the Apostle Rom. 4. worketh wrath and ephes 2. he saith we are saued by faith and that not of our selues for that it is the worke of God not of workes least any should boast but our aduersaries confesse that Charity is a worke and not without the cooperation of freewill the fathers also teach otherwise Hierome dial aduers Pelag. opposing the law to the Gospell sheweth that the foundation of workes is laid on the law but that the building of faith and grace is laid vpon the same in the Gospell Theophylact. in praefat Euangel sheweth vs that the Gospell doth declare to vs good things as remission of sinnes c. and that we obteine them without our labour sinally herein the Papists dissent from their master Peter Lombard sent 3. dist 40. for he saith the decalogue is a killing letter but the decalogue requireth performance of all things commanded Fifthly Peter Lombard saith that only earthly things were promised in the old testament and only heauenly things in the new as we read sent 3. d. 40. but our Sauior Christ teacheth vs to aske for our daily sustenance in the Gospell and to those that performed Gods eternall law eternall life was promised in the old testament or else the reward had not beene correspondent to the worke Sixthly they teach generally that there are three euangelicall Counsels to wit of chastitie pouertie and obedience as if these were the principall points of the Gospell or as if the obedience to monkish rules and forswearing of mariage and giuing all to monkes were required of vs in the Gospell further it is absurd to thinke that chastity and renouncing all for Gods sake and perfect obedience is not commanded in the law of God Seuenthly the Friers purposing to ouerthrow Christs Gospell about the yeare of our Lord 1256. published another new Gospell which they called Euangelium aeternum as if Christs Gospell should continue but for a time and their Gospell were to continue for euer Of this Gospell thus writeth Matth. Paris in his collection for that yeare Fratres noita quaedam praedicabant legebant docebant deliramenta ex libris Ioachimi abbatis incipitque eorum liber Euangelium aeternum c. that is the Friers did preach read teach certaine new fooleries out of the bookes of abbot Ioachim and their booke began thus The eternall Gospell so it appeareth what respect these fellowes Faue of the Gospell of Christ Nay albeit the booke was most blasphemous yet did not the Pope punish the authors but onely commanded the same to bee abolished secretly Finally all the comfort that the Papists giue their followers out of the Gospell is this that Christ is the meritorious cause of our saluation but the rest they assigne to mens owne labours and workes teaching them how to merit heauen by giuing to Monkes and putting on Friers coules and how they are to goe on pilgrimage and to buy indulgences and how to passe through Purgatory and this is the Gospell of Papists of saith they talke only as of a disposition to iustification and little do they trust in Christs mercy flying to Angels to our Lady and Saints and to Christs iustice remitting our sins and accepting vs freely through faith in him they giue nothing CHAP. VI. Of the impious doctrine of Papists concerning Christ our Sauiour AS Christ is made vnto vs by God wisedome iustice sanctification and redemption so those which teach false doctrine concerning him do goe about to turne our wisdome into foolishnesse and to depriue vs of true righteousnesse holinesse and redemption but whether the Papists haue done so or no that resteth now to be discussed we doubt not to challenge them as infinitly guilty herein for first they say that Christ was vir perfectus a perfect man from the first instant of his conception but this destroieth not only the distinction of ages but ouerthroweth Christs humane nature for rules of reason teach vs to distinguish children from men and this is the course of nature man is first conceiued then borne then a child and so in time he groweth a man of perfect years the same is also contrary to scriptures that shew how Christ was conceiued and borne and was first an infant and then a man of perfect age this error proceeded of the false vnderstanding of these words of the Prophet mulier eircumdabit virum Secondly Peter Lombard lib. 3. sent 10. dist teacheth that Christ as he is man is not any thing but in respect of the vnitie of the person quidam dicunt saith he Christum secundum hominem non esse personam nec aliquid nisi forte secundum sit expressiuum vnitatis personae and this opinion he alloweth and would haue the distinction to be remembred but all Christians that professe the faith of Christ and rehearse the Creed of Athanasius confesse that he is not only somewhat as man but also a perfect man they also know that the opinion of the master of schoolemen followed by diuers ouerthroweth Christs humanity Thirdly they take from Christ both faith and hope and all vpon their vaine conceit that Christ was not viator but comprehensor that is was not in the way but alwaies as man was glorified and enioyed the vision of the God-head in Christo non fuit sides saith Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 7. art 4. ergo nec spes that is Christ had neither faith nor hope he speaketh of Christ according to his humane nature and this opinion is commonly followed of others so that which they falselie obiected to Caluin concerning the vttering of certain words of desperation that doth rightly fall vpon the Papists who blasphemously make him not only a desperate man without hope but also an infidell without faith Fourthly the master of sentences lib. 3. dist 1. determineth that the Father and the holy Ghost might haue beene made man and yet may sicut filius homo factus est ita puter vel spiritus sanctus potuit potest as the sonne was made man so likewise the father and holy ghost might and yet may which is not farre from the heresie of the Patripassians for they held that the father did suffer death for vs these holde that he might haue taken our nature vpon him and haue suffered death for vs. Fiftly Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 3. art 6. teacheth that the three persons in the Trinitie might assume one humane nature tres personae diuinae subsistunt vni naturae diuinae sayth he ergo possunt etiam vni naturae humanae subsistere so he sheweth that the Patripassians held no incommodious opinion and introduceth an absurd heresie of the passion of the holy Ghost Sixtly they holde that the body of Christ may be in many yea almost in insinit places at one time and that the same is wont so to be Multis adeoque ferè insinitis simul locis adesse potest solet sayth Bellarmine lib. 3. de Christo c. 11. and so it must needs be if
commit fornication in thought than to marry the Popes of Rome haue not onely coueted but also vsurped diuers parts of the Empire and thus hoping to be saued by the law the Papists not onely by their practise but also by their doctrine ouerthrow the law the Pope by his dispensations annulleth and frustrateth the law his complices more regard the Popes decretales than the eternall law of the liuing God This law of God they say may bee persectly performed by the assistance of Gods grace and as touching the substance of the action they hold that it may be performed without grace ex quo efficitur saith Bellarmine lib. 5. de lib. arbit c. 9. tot am Dei legem absque auxilio gratiae quoad substant iam actionis ab hominibus recte seruari posse in the same booke c. 2. hee saith that without any speciall helpe of God man may know veritatem moralem or the morall law with the circumstances thereof which is not onely contrary to scriptures declaring mans weakenesse and blindnesse but also ouerthroweth the necessity of Gods grace for if man without grace both knoweth the truth and is able according to the substance of the action to performe the law then is he not dead in trespasses and sinnes as the Apostle saith nor doe the Papists beleeue in Christ which saith without mee you can doe nothing doth it not then appeare that popery is false erroneous and repugnant to Gods law the ancient faith in the doctrine of the law CHAP. IIII. Of the damnable doctrine of Papists concerning faith and iustification THe Apostle teacheth vs that the iust shall liue by faith but the Papists doe so handle the doctrine of faith that the same cannot quicken any but is like rather to be the occasion of the fall and death of many first they teach that iustifying faith is nothing else but a firme assent to the word of God but if a firme assent to euery word of God do iustifie then are Christians iustified by beleeuing that there is a Diuell as well as beleeuing that there is a God and as well are they iustified by beleeuing the curses of the law as beleeuing that grace and mercy is offered them in Iesus Christ nay as well may the Diuels haue iustifying saith as faithfull Christians for they do giue their assent to the word of God and beleeue that hee is truth but these are most damnable doctrines Secondly they say that Christians are as well to beleeue the traditions of the church not written as the holy scriptures the doctors of Trent will haue both receiued with equall affection the authors of the censure of Colleinsol 91. teach Christians to beleeue not only such things as are reuealed in scriptures but also such points as are deliuered from hand to hand but if this be granted then will it follow that Christians are as wel to beleeue the Pope or the Church of Rome as God himselfe and that faith is built vpon mans word and not onely vpon the word of God and lastly that faith is built not only vpon vncertainties but also vpon falshood for such are the traditions of the church of Rome many are vncertaine and some very false and erroneous as is particularly shewed in diuers treatises against Romish traditions Thirdly they teach that faith is a gift and light by which a man being illustrated doth firmly assent adhere to those things which are reuealed by God and proposed to vs by the Church est Dei donum lumen saith Canisius Cathechismi c. 1. quo illustrat us homo firmiter assentitur atque adhaeret ijs quae vt credantur sunt diuinitus reuelata ab Ecclesiae nobis proposita now by the church they vnderstand the Pope and church of Rome but of this it followeth first that the Church of Rome hath no faith for how can a Church propose and teach matters to itselfe this doth vtterly destroy the nature of relations and therefore I thinke the learned Romanists will hardly confesse this to be true it followeth next that Christians are neither to beleeue in Christ nor to professe the articles of the faith vnlesse the Pope and Church of Rome propose them vnto vs. but this is most absurd and impious for we beleeue in God and not in the Pope nor in the Church adhering to him that these consequents are good it is euident because they no lesse require that the articles of faith be proposed to vs by the Church of Rome than that they be reuealed by God Fourthly as well doth Canisius require that Christians beleeue that the whole body of Christ be contained in the eucharist as Papists do hold it as the article of the Trinity the creation of the world and Christes incarnation for all these articles he ioineth together Catech. c. 1. § 4. but hee could not say worse if he meant to ouerthrow the whole Christian faith for the Popish real presence of Christs body bloud in the sacrament is contrary to Christs meaning to words of scriptures exposition of fathers the nature of sacraments and to humane reason and fense as at large is iustified in my bookes de missa against Bellarmine Fifthly they teach that the wicked and reprobate nay that the diuels of hell may haue true faith but our Sauiour Christ saith Iohn 3. that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue euerlasting life so it followeth by the doctrine of Papists that the reprobate and the diuels of hell may be saued Sixthly they affirme that charity is the forme of faith but the Apostle teacheth vs that the iust doe liue by faith of which it followeth that faith hath a forme of it selfe whereby it quickneth vs. furthermore it is an absurd thing to make one vertue or habit the forme of another and if this were tolerable that one qualitie were the forme of another yet would it seeme farre more probable that faith should be the forme and life of charity and workes for that without faith it is not possible to please God than that charity should be the forme of faith which doth follow of faith Seuenthly the Iebusites of Collein fol. 122. teach that faith is onelie of generall propositions and hope of particulars so it followeth of their doctrine that no Christian ought to beleeue that he or any other particular person hath his sinnes forgiuen or is of the body of the church or shall be saued but if this were true then do not the Iebusites beleeue that themselues shall rise againe or appeare in iudgement further then can they not beleeue that Pope Clement or Leo or Paul is the head of the church or that they are to subiect themselues vnto him or that this particular Church of Rome is the true Church and such other particular propositions Eightly they teach that we are not iustified by the remission of sinnes or by imputation of Christs righteousnesse but the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. sheweth that Christ is made to
therefore thinke that either the Christians there made the images of God the father and the holy ghost or else worshipped and burnt incense to them and very absurd it were if any man should suppose that the Popish inuocation and worship of Saints and Angels is to be proued by their practise Philo in legat ad Caium saith the Iewes thought it impious either in picture or grauen worke to represent God that is inuisible inuisibilem Deum pingere aut singere nefas duxerunt maiores nostri saith he neither if we runne through the Bible shall wee find any precedent of the popish inuocation and worship of Saints vsed in the Romish church Finally if the Church of Hierusalem had knowen or suspected that S. Peter or his successors had been designed Christs vicars general and monarchs of the Church and appointed to giue lawes to the whole world then would they neuer haue suffered him to depart from Hierusalem The Pope and his complices therefore must seeke some other place than Hierusalem whence to deriue their doctrine lawes ceremonies and formes of gouernment or else they will neuer find out the true descent of their church In Babylon certes they shall rather find out these matters than in Hierusalem CHAP. XII That popish religion was neuer taught either by the old Prophets or by the Apostles of Christ Iesus FAithfull Christians as the Apostle teacheth vs Ephes 2. are built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corner stone and this the Papists must needs confesse although much to their griefe vnlesse they will denie the words of the Apostle but popery is built vpon the Pope and vpon his decretales and determinations and supported stoutly by his purple Cardinals and the merchants of Babylon the Masse-priests and neither vpon Christ nor the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets The Apostle 2. Tim. 3. sheweth that the scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation and are giuen of God that the man of God may be absolute and made perfect vnto all good workes but Papists teach that they are an imperfect rule and without traditions vnsufficient for that is the doctrine of Bellarmine and all his consorts they doe also raile against holy scriptures and call them a dead and killing letter The holy Prophets brought no message to those nations to whom they were sent but they confirmed the same by the testimony of God that sent them saying thus saith the Lord. and the Lord hath spoken it but the conuenticle of Trent confirmed their doctrine by their owne pleasures for the most part and albeit sometime the same alleadgeth scriptures yet their best and common argument was placet nobis their schoole doctors also for matters controuersed doe more commonly alleadge the Popes decretales than holy scriptures Rom. 10. we read that faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God but Camsius in his catechisme de sid symb signifieth that we are not to beleeue Gods word reuealed vnlesse the same be also propounded by the church and by the church he vnderstandeth the Pope and his adherents Peter and Iohn Act. 4. shew that God is rather to be obeied than man but the Romish church doth excommunicate all that hearken not to the Pope whatsoeuer is contained in the scriptures to the contrary The conuenticle of Trent Sess 4. teacheth vs that we are to imbrace traditions not written with equall affection to traditions and holy scriptures but this doctrine was not knowen either to the Apostles or Prophets nay Moyses doth teach quite contrary ye shall put nothing to the word which I command you nor shall ye take ought therefrom saith he Deut. 4. and S. Paul Galat. 1. if any man preach vnto you otherwise than that ye haue receiued saith he let him be accursed this curse therefore doth fall on the Friers and Masse priests that preach the Popes doctrines which they shal neuer proue to haue beene receiued from the Apostles though they read vntill their eies drop out of their heads The religion of Papists doth for the most part consist in praiers to Saints Masses and offices in the honour of Angels the Virgin Mary martyrs confessors and the Popes canonized creatures in erecting of crosses and crucifixes and other images in burning incense before images nay they giue diuine honour to creatures which themselues cannot denie to bee idolatrous cum Christus adoretur adoratione latriae consequens est quòd cius imago sit adoratione latriae adoranda seeing Christ saith Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 25. art 3. is worshipped with latria or honour properly belonging to God it followeth that his image is also to be worshipped with the adoration of latria or diuine worship either therefore must our aduersaries shew that the Prophets and Apostles offered sacrifices in honour of Angels and Saints and made praiers vnto them and set vp images to be worshipped in temples and vsed to burne incense vnto them and to honor them after the manner of Papists or else they must confesse that their religion proceedeth not from the Prophets and Apostles how hard this proofe will bee it may appeare in this that Gods lawes Deut. 4. and Exod. 20. directly forbid the making of grauen images after the likenesse of God and the worship of idols and Christ ordeined the eucharist to be receiued in commemoration of his death and passion and neuer so much as mentioned the offering of his owne body and bloud or other sacrifices in the honour of Saints and Angels The Masse-priests that plotted the ruine of religion at Trent sess 6. ascribe mans iustification to his workes and exclude iustification both by Christs iustice and by faith apprehending Christ and beleeuing in him but both the Prophet Abacuc chap. 2. and S. Paul Rom. 1. affirme that the iust do liue by faith the Apostle also 1. Cor. 1. saith that our Saour Christ is made wisedome and righteousnesse vnto vs. which if it were wrought by our workes then should we haue beene made wisedome and righteousnesse vnto our selues nay the Apostle Rom. 3. saith if Abraham were iustified by workes that then he had wherein to reioice but not with God Popish religion consisteth most in externall ceremonies as for example in salt holy water holy candles incense ringing of sacring belles adoring crosses and images greasing of sicke men and masse-priests shauing of crownes vowes Monkish rules and such like toyes but these fooleries were neuer knowen either to the Apostles or Prophets Nay our Sauiour Matth. 15. teacheth that in vaine they seeke to worship God that teach for doctrines the precepts of men he sheweth also Iohn 4. that true worshippers worship God in spirit and truth and the Apostle Coloss 2. condemneth such as put religion in touching fasting and such like vaine ceremonies The Masse-priests call the Pope the spouse and head of the church but if he meane to deriue his authoritie from the writings of the Prophets and
yet they say Christians sinne mortally if they heare not Masse euery Sunday and holiday Of grace they speake as men deuoid of grace and knowledge for by grace by which we are saued and made acceptable to God they vnderstand nothing else but either charity or a habit not distinct from Charity so that albeit they exclude not grace from the worke of our saluation yet making grace a habit or vertue they ouerthrow grace and ascribe the merit of our saluation not to Gods mercie through Christ nor to the merit of his Passion but properly to our owne workes and merites diuers of them saie that men are predestinated for their merites foreseene and all hold that men were reprobated for their sinnes foreseene before they say further that the vnregenerat hath freewill as well as the regenerat and that not onely in matters of this life but also to doe workes of piety and other supernaturall effectes The doctrine of faith they haue also much corrupted for they make Charity the forme of faith as if faith were without forme or life of it selfe and as if the iust man did not liue by faith to this purpose they say that not onlie wicked and reprobat men but also the diuels of hell maie haue true and iustifying faith they hold further that by faith we are not onely to hold whatsoeuer is conteined in holy scriptures but also whatsoeuer is deliuered by tradition or determined by the Pope and lastly that no man is to beleeue that he shall assuredly be saued but rather to hold that he that is truly iustified may be damned Concerning the law of God they teach both contrary to reason and law for first they cut out the 2. commandement in their offices of our Lady and their primers because it cannot well stand with the Popish worship of images secondly they teach that concupiscence without our consent is not sinne albeit the law say non concupisces thirdly they say that it is sinne as well to transgresse the Popes decrees as Gods lawes fourthly they beleeue that the Pope is able either to dissolue the law as for example where he absolueth subiectes from their obedience to princes and children from their duty to parents or at the least to dispense with the transgressors of the law as for example with periured persons adulterers Sodomites murtherers assassinors theeues sacrilegious persons and such like fiftly they beleeue that a man is able perfectly to fulfill the law of which it followeth that man is able to liue without all sinne which as Augustine sheweth lib. 4. de bono perseuerat c. 2. 5 and Hierome aduers Pelag. is flat Pelagianisme In their doctrine of praiers they offend much yet is the practise of Papists farre worse than their doctrine in this point our Sauiour teacheth vs to goe to his father in his name they go to God by the intercession of Saints nay oftentimes they run to Saints Angels and the blessed Virgin without once thinking of God especially if they thinke no more than they vtter in their praiers they pray in a tongue which they vnderstand not which is rather prating than praying they pray for remission of sinnes for the dead not knowing whether they bee damned or no. they pray before stockes and stones nay they put their trust in them for if this were not so why should they hope for better successe at the image of our Lady of Loreto or Monserat than at any other image or forme of our Lady They beleeue that almes satisfie for sinnes and that those are best bestowed that are giuen to Monkes and Friers and such idle vagabonds and plagues of states whereas the first ouerthroweth Christs merits and satisfaction the second is an occasion of all the mischiefes brewed by these mothes of religion and blemishes of state They teach that it is mortall sinne not to fast on Saints vigiles embre daies and other times appointed by the Pope and that fasting standeth in eating fish and abstaining from our suppers and such obseruances and finally that such fasts doe not only satisfie for sinnes but also merit heauen Conscience they know not for they make no conscience to cut Christian mens throats for not yeelding to all their abhominations and thinke it conscience to obey the Popes decrees though very vnlawfull Neither can they well auoid sinne that know not what sinne is The virgin Mary by most of them is acquited from originall sinne and they define sinne to bee not onely the transgression of the law of God but also euery transgression of the law of the Pope nay euery breach of the law of man which vtterly taketh away the difference betwixt the lawes of God and man Of the state of soules departed they seeme to know little truly although some say they know too much for they do not say as we doe that there are two waies after this life the one of the faithfull to eternall life the other of the wicked to eternall death but they say that some go into purgatorie and others into limbus puerorum and out of purgatory they say soules are deliuered partly by masses and partly by indulgences All these points of erroneous false doctrine and all others which either contrarie or beside the word of God the Pope and his complices haue inuented and brought into the church of Rome we call Popery and this is the subiect of this discourse and the doctrine against which we dispute let no man therefore thinke because the Papists maintaine many points of Christian religion that either we reprehend that truth which they and we defend or that they can defend the errors of Popery because they hold some trueth but either let them iustifie their errors or else they shall bee forced to confesse that the proper doctrine of Popery is wicked and erroneous CHAP. II. Of the grounds and foundations of Popish religion AS Popery is diuers from Christian religion so hath the same other foundations than Christian religion The doctors of Trent in the fourth session of that synode hauing pronounced them anathema that shall not receiue all the bookes of the Bible as they are found in the old Latin vulgar translation and read in the church of Rome for holy and canonicall or that shall wittinglie contemne the traditions of that church doe signifie that this is the foundation of the confession of faith which they meant to publish so it appeareth they ground their faith beside canonicall scriptures vpon apocryphall writings of Tobiah Iudith Wisedome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees and diuers fragments of books not found in the Hebrew text of the Bible and vpon traditions not written but deliuered from hand to hand from the Apostles as they say and so come to their hands but where they speake of scriptures it is to be obserued that they doe not simply allow them but as they are contained in the old vulgar translation and as they are expounded by the Church of Rome those which vnder any
which they seeke greedily in Caluin but finde not 18. Certein Papists as the Master of the sentences sheweth lib. 3. dist 12. § 5. suppose that the sonne of God might haue assumed our nature in the sexe of a woman quidam arbitrantur saith he deum potuisse assumere hominem in foemineo sexu vt assumsit in virili and he doth not deny it but this inconuenience would haue followed that the sonne of God should haue been the daughter and not the sonne of man such absurdities are they which haue sounded in time past in Christian mens eares 19. Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 49. art 1. assigneth three means by which Christ hath wrought our saluation whereof the first is for that by his example he hath prouoked vs to charitie tribus modis saith he causauit nostram salutem primùm per moduÌ„ prouocationis ad charitatem but the scriptures shew that he is therefore called a Sauiour because he hath saued his people from their sinnes and if for this cause hee might be called a Sauiour then euerie one that prouoketh vs to charitie might be a Sauiour 20. Commonly they teach that Christ is only the meritorious cause of our iustification saluation and redemption and Kellison p. 261. assigneth this for a reason because he deserued grace for vs at Gods hands by which together with our cooperation wee may bee saued and redeemed but if he be the meritorious cause only of our iustâ—â—â—cation saluation and redemption then is he not properly our Sauiour and redeemer nor doth he iustifie vs. for not he that meriteth at our friends hands that wee should be ransomed out of the hands of our enemies but our friend that paieth our ransome is our redeemer so this blasphemous wretch denieth Christ to be properly our redeemer and Sauiour and next he maketh euery man his owne Sauiour and redeemer 21. Likewise the same surueior pag. 262. telleth his followers that Christ hath therefore freed vs from the tyranny of the diuell and captiuity of hel because he hath procured vs grace by the which when the diuell by him selfe or the world or the flesh prouoketh vs wee may resist mauger all the force of hell which is as much as if he should say that Christ hath not ouerthrowne or triumphed ouer our enemies but hath procured vs grace to ouerthrow the diuel and to triumph ouer him our selues that he is not the strong man that hath bound vp the Diuell that had vs in possession but that he hath made vs strong and able to binde the Diuell of the deliuerance from sinne and from the curse of the law by Christ he maketh no mention and if you aske him what he meaneth by grace he will tell you of charitie or a habit not distinct from charity such is the blasphemous doctrine of these impostors they ascribe the worke of their redemption immediatly to themselues and a farre off to Christ 22. He telleth vs further pag. 336. that Christes death was sufficient to haue redeemed the Deuils and damned also but this assertion supposeth a contradiction viz. that the same Persons may be both saued and damned it supposeth also that the Deuils and the damned may be saued which is an assertion direct contrary to the decree of God concerning their damnation would not then such impostors with their vaine supposals be chased from among Christians and placed among the damned crew of which he himselfe sometime talketh I doe the rather make mention of his contemptible fellow albeit he deserue no place among the learned because he gaue vs the first occasion to make this Surueie 22. Clement the sixth in the chapter vnigenitus extr com de poenit remiss doth apply these words from the sole of the foote vnto the head there is nothing whole vnto Christ as if Christ had nothing whole in him whereas the Prophet Isay c. 1. doth speake of the sinfull people of the Iewes for a little before he said ah finfull nation is not then this a proper comparison to match the immaculate lambe of God with an impure and finfull people and is not this a plaine abuse of scripture 23. The same man in the same place saith that the shedding of one drop of Christs blood would haue been sufficient for the redemption of all mankind his words are pro redemtione totius humani generis suffecisset but Kellison in his suruey pag. 256. goeth much further and saith that Christ with one teare or one word and not only with one drop of blood might haue redeemed vs. thus these impudent wretches euacuate the crosse of Christ and make his death superfluous which wee would the rather maruell at but that they are teachers of Antichrist and opposite to Christ and enemies of his crosse 24. For the most part they ioin the merites of Christ and his mother and other Saintes together and of them they make a treasure out of which the Pope may bestow indulgences to such as neede them or desire them but it is absurd to thinke that the Pope or any mortall man hath power to dispose or dispence Christes merites For he himselfe hath formerly disposed of them beside that it is a great disparagement to Christes merites either to supply them with the merits of Saints or to make Saints and mortall men redeemers and Sauiors and deliuerers from sinne 25. Bellarmine lib. 1. de indulgentijs affirmeth that Christ had superfluous merites as if Christ had not knowen how much was sufficient or left others to discerne of his merits better then he did himselfe 26. The scriptures teach vs that by the merits of Christs death only we haue remission of sinnes but Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 49. art 1. saith that by charity wee obteine remission of sinnes Caritate consequimur veniam peccatorum saith Aquinas 27. Of the virgin Mary most of them say that she was conceiued without originall sinne and of Hieremy and S. Iohn Baptist that they were sanctified in their mothers wombe of which it followeth that Christ is not the redeemer of all mankind for what needed they a redeemer that were not borne sinners nor subiect to the curse of the law 28. But nothing is more blasphemous then that they teach that dogs and hoggs mise and birds and other brute beastes doe eate the true bodie of Christ when they eat the Sacrament nay that such beasts doe eat their God but this is the opinion of Alexander Hales of Thomas Aquinas and the schoolemen best reputed of and the master of sentences holding the contrarie lib. 4. sent dist 13. is therefore censured now herein they passe the idolatrous gentiles for the Aegyptians did not eate those creatures which they adored as Gods these deuoure their God and Sauiour like bread 29. They say that Christs true body is in the sacrament and yet he hath neither flesh nor bone that can bee felt or seene there this therefore is not farre from the heresie of Valentinus and destroieth the verity of
wormes to be engendied if it be long kept and that both the kinds are corrupted but it is blasphemous to say that either Christs body and blood are corrupted or that wormes can issue and be engendred thereof to auoid this inconuenience they say they are engendred of the accidents or of the bread and wine returning againe For the engendring of wormes of meere accidents is absurd and for the returne of bread and wine they can bring foorth no words of scripture 29. Thomas Aquinas p. 3 q. 77. art 7. confesseth that Christs body is not broken in the Sacrament and gladlie would he shew how the accidents there may be broken but he traueileth with vanitie and bringeth foorth nothing but foolerie 30. Commonly Masse-Priests say that Christ at his last supper did eat himselfe and drinke his owne blood before it was shed matters that imply manifest contradiction and dissolue rules of reason 31. Now the spaniards will not denie but they are canibals and eaters of mens flesh that eate the same whether rosted broiled baked or otherwise dressed why then should not the Masse-priests be auoided as eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood as they say themselues albeit they eate Christs flesh and drinke his blood prepared vnder other formes 32. The fathers say that Christs bodie is meate for the soule and not to be eaten with the teeth but Nicholas the second will haue it torne with teeth as his words import c. ego Berengarius de consecrat dist 2. others will haue it swallowed into the belly 33. Christians abhorre to heare that Christs bodie should be eaten and his blood drunken of brute beastes but Papists teach and confesse both 34. Christ gaue his disciples the cuppe of the new testament the Pope and his complices sacrilegiously take the same from Gods people 35. Christ said take and cate the Masse-priests suffer them that haue them to gape and gaze and giue them often nothing to eate 36. Christians beleeue that they receiue the same Sacrament that Christs disciples receiued at his last supper but Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 81. art 3. saith the disciples receiued it passible and such as it then was but now no man can receiue his true body but he must receiue it as it is in heauen that is as it is glorified and impassible 37. They say that the eucharist is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice and for those two ends instituted but that implieth a plaine contradiction for as the sacrifice is offred to God so the Sacrament is ordeined and giuen to men 38. If poison after consecration be mingled in the Sacrament Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 83. art 6. will haue the same kept among Saints reliques but what Christian will rescrue poison for a relique 39. The Apostle saith Christ was once offred the Masse-priests say he is offred continually and that for quicke and dead a matter vnknowen to Christs Apostles 40. Our Sauiour instituted this Sacrament for a remembrance of his death and passion but the Masse-priests offer the Sacrifice of his bodie and blood for quicke dead for sicke for hole for sailers for trauellers in the honor of Sainte and Angels for peace and good successe in all things which bee matters neuer thought vpon in the institution of this Sacrament Finallie they haue no lesse strange false and contrary positions in their doctrine of matrimony order penance and extreme vnction which they make Sacraments but by this it may appeare sufficiently how litle they regard either the institution of Christ or the doctrine of the ancient catholicke church in the matter of Sacraments I shall also haue occasion otherwhere to touch these pointes particularlie CHAP. VIII That poperie is a mixture of old and new heresies IT were long to insist vpon euery article of Popish doctrine I will therefore rather in a generality shew the qualities proceedings and practises thereof running through the whole then dilate the absurdities and falsities of euery particular standing vpon euerie small point now then that I haue touched the grounds and certaine principall doctrines of Popery I haue thought good to shew that the rest is nothing but either old or later heresies They glory in their workes and hope to bee iustified by the law as may be gathered out of Bellarmines disputes de iustificatione and also out of diuers of their treatises of good workes the Iebusites of Collein censur fol. 22. say that all their life and saluation consisteth in the precepts of the law whose fulnesse is loue they doe also extoll the merits of their workes but the Apostle Rom. 2. taxeth them that glory in the law and Galat. 3. condemned those false Apostles that taught iustification by the law 2. They make Gods law void by their traditions of worshipping images maintaining publike stewes banks of vsury and such like practises the which is noted as an error in the scribes and pharisies reprobastis mandatum Dei saith our Sauiour Marc. 7. per seniorum vestrorum traditionem and as they had their Talmud so haue the Papists their decrees and decretales which they follow as the law of God 3. The Monks and Iebusites are also like to Pharisies dicebantur pharisaei saith Epiphanius haeres 16. ante Christum co quod separati essent ab alijs propter spontaneam superfluam religionem apud ipsos receptam the Pharisies were so called for that they were separated from others for voluntary and supersluous religion receiued by them they compassed also sea and land to make Proselytes and when they had won them they made them twise more the children of hell then they were themselues as our Sauiour Matth. 23. teacheth vs. so likewise for a spontaneous and superfluous shew of religion these irreligious Iebusites and Monkes do separate themselues from others and take great paines to winne Proselytes to the synagogue of Rome and in the end abuse many and make them much worse than themselues 4. In their supersophisticall exposition of the law and their often washings and affectate holinesse they imitate the scribes who for this cause by Epiphanius haeres 15. ante Christum are enrolled in the catalogue of heretickes 5. By their often washing in holy water the Papists hope to wash awaie sinnes as the Hemerobaptists among the Iewes which for this were reputed heretiks as Epiphanius sheweth haeres 17. ante Christum but there he telleth them that neither drops nor riuers of water nor the whole ocean can wash awaie sinnes 6. The Dositheans were reputed heretickes for their affectation of virginity and abstinence from mariage and punishing their bodies why then should not the like accompt be made of those Papists that runne into the same errors not sparing their bodies more than they did whom the Apostle Coloss 2. reprehendeth 7. Iohn the 23. was condemned in the councell of Constance for denying the immortality of the soule the like opinion as Zegedinus in spec pontif and others report had Alexander the sixth Leo
Bishops of Rome or else he must know that whatsoeuer he fableth of his three supposed conuersions the same will make for the destruction of Popery and the ouerthrow of the cause which he mainteineth Secondly we are able to prooue that all these corruptions of doctrine superstitious deuises impieties blasphemies which we refuse haue beene receiued and established in the synagogue of Rome not onely since the Apostles times but also since the time of Eleutherius and Gregory the first the idolatrous worship of images was first confirmed by the second coūncell of Nice vnder the Empire of Irene and by little and little brought into the Westerne church being long oppugned by the bishops of France Germany and Britain That the images of the crosse and Trinity should be worshipped with latria was not allowed in that idolatrous councell but first taught by Thomas Aquinas and his followers and grounded not vpon Gods word but vpon this rule of Philosophy that the same motion is directed to the image and the thing imagined which rule by him is mistaken being meant of the species or representation of things in our vnderstanding and not of materiall images that come not within our vnderstanding The Popes authority began to be established first by the rebellion of Gregory the second and Gregory the third that caused Italy to reuolt from the Emperour vnder pretence of worship of images and afterward the same was confirmed by Gregory the seuenth and his successors that by force and violence ouerthrew the empire and made way by the diuisious of Christendome to the victories and conquests of the Turkes and Saracens Boniface the third obteined of Phocas that the church of Rome should be reputed head of other churches Boniface the 9. as Theodoric à Niem in his booke of schisme testifieth by fraude vsurped first the temporall gouernment ouer the Citie and territorie of Rome which before that belonged either to the emperor or to the citizens and thus by fraud and violence the Pope made himselfe great and by little and little exalted himselfe in the church and erected the kingdome of Antichrist The carnall eating and presence of Christs body in the sacrament was first decreed by Nicolas the second in the Chap. ego Berengarius dist 2. de consecrat for there we read first that Christs true body is handled with the hands of Priests broken and torne with the teeth of the faithfull his words prescribed to Berengarius are verum corpus sanguinem domini nostri Iesu Christi esse sensualiter non solum sacramentum sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Transubstantiation got reputation first by the decree of Innocent the 3. as we read in the chapter Firmiter de sum Trin. fid cath for there he decreeth that the bread is transubstantiate into the body and the wine into blood by the power of God but yet two inconueniences will heere fall out if we yeeld to his words for there he saith that Christ is both the priest and the sacrifice and that this transubstantiation is wrought by the power of God whereof the first ouerthroweth the priesthood of the polshorne priests of Baal the second doth take away the efficacie from these wordes hoc est enim corpus meum and hic est sanguis meus and ascribeth all to the power of God absolutely In the conuenticle of Constance we finde it first resolued that the accidents of bread and wine doe remaine without subiect and that the Pope is Christs immediate vicar and sess 13. that although Christ did institute the eucharist in bread and wine yet lay-men were onely to receine it vnder one kinde Auricular confession was established by Innocent the 3. in the chap. omnis vtriusque sexus de poenit remiss for before that it was free to confesse or not to confesse the doctrine of confession was enlarged by the canonistes and schoole-men In the conuenticle of Florence we reade that the forme of ordring masse-priestes of popish confirmation and extreme vnction and of other popish sacraments was then first setled by law there also Purgatorie and the Popes supremacy was first enacted by force of law Clement the 6. in the chapter vnigenitus extr de poenit remis did first deuise the treasure of indulgences Boniface the 8. and Sixtus the 4. ordred the Popish Iubiley That the Pope is aboue the Councel it was first decreed in the councel of Lateran vnder Leo the 10. who also begā first to thunder out his excommunications against M. Luther Finally the conuenticle of Trent gaue finall complement to the Popish doctrine of Traditions of the Latine vulgar translation of concupiscence of formal iustification by charitie and works of seuen sacraments of the sacrifice of the masse of purgatorie and indulgences of framing the images of God the Father and the holy Ghost and the rest of their heresies and abuses for what before the schoolemen had taught vainlie that began now by the decrees of the Pope and his complices to be established and held for law then also the missals breuiaries offices and other rituall bookes began to be confirmed by the Popes authoritie Thirdly it is an easie matter to prooue that the doctrine of S. Peter and of the times wherein Ioseph of Arimathaea Eleutherius and Gregory the first liued is direct contrarie in diuers points to popish religion S. Peter 1. ep 2. exhorted all Christians to submit themselues to kings and gouernors but the Pope commandeth subiects to rebell and take armes against princes and excommunicateth such as refuse so to doe as appeareth by the excommunication of Paul the 3. against king Henry the 8. and of Pius the fift against Queene Elizabeth both which are extant in Sanders his libell de schismate S. Peter 1. ep 1. would haue Christians to trust perfectly on gods grace the Papists teach their disciples to distrust gods grace and to doubt of their saluation and to trust rather in their owne works and merits he saith we are not redeemed with corruptible things but with Christes most precious blood these teach that men are redeemed after a sort by indulgences and by the satisfaction and merites of Saints to whom Bellarmine in his booke of indulgences doubteth not to giue the title of redeemers S. Peter exhorteth Christians to desire the sincere milke of Gods word that they may grow thereby the papistes barre men from hearing Gods word in tongues which they vnderstand and send them to beleeue the traditions of the church of Rome and the impure trash of the schoolemen and the Popes decretales he excludeth the lordship of Popes ouer Gods inheritance these false teachers enforce it he exhorteth vs to make our election sure these fellowes teach that Christians cannot be assured of their election or make it sure Ioseph of Arimathaea and the godly bishops that liued in his time and diuers hundred yeeres after him continued we doubt not in