pretence doe reiect the old translation or vse any interpretation contrary to the Romish Churches meaning they condemne Stapleton in his booke intituled Principia doctrinalia doth deliuer vnto vs seuen grounds or principles of his religion the first is the Church the second the Pope the third the means vsed by the Pope in iudgement the fourth the Popes infallibility in iudgement the fifth his power in taxing the canon of Scriptures the sixth his certaine interpretation of Scriptures the seuenth his power in deliuering doctrine not written these I say are his grounds and principles absurdly deuised confusedly disposed and ridiculously propounded as God willing shall be shewed otherwhere now it is sufficient to declare that whatsoeuer he bableth elsewhere of scriptures councels fathers yet heere they are all suppressed in this diuision or at the least concealed vnder the name of the Church or Pope which in his preface to Gregory the 13. hee calleth supremum numen in terris that is the supreme God of the world and who to him is all in all likewise in his preface to his relection of doctrinall principles hee seemeth directly to exclude the scriptures Christianae religionis fundamentum habemus saith he ab ipsis literis apostolicis euangelicis uliud that is we haue another foundation of Christian religion diuers from the writings of the Apostles Prophets if he exclude not scriptures yet he admitteth them no otherwise than according to the interpretation of the Pope and his complices nay without the Popes declaration he doth tediouslie discourse that Christians are not to receiue the canon of scriptures The decretale epistles of the Pope no doubt they admit for the foundation of their faith for in the rubricke of their decrees c. in canonicis dist 19. they doe determine that the Popes decretales are to bee numbred among canonicall scriptures inter canonicas scripturas say they decretales epistolae connumerantur likewise Gelasius c. sancta Romana dist 15. defineth that the Popes decretale epistles are to bee receiued with veneration In the same decretale Gelasius authoriseth the Romane martyrologe or legends of martyrs neither can Kellison or his kettle companions deny this to be one of the grounds of his rammish I would say Romish religion seeing these martyrologes and legendes conteine diuers traditions which the conuenticle of Trent will haue all Papistes to receiue with equall affection to scriptures Canus lib. 1. loc theolog c. 1. assigneth tenne places out of which he saith diuines are to draw arguments the first is the authority of scriptures the second the authority of traditions not written the third is the authority of the catholike church the fourth the authority of councels the fifth the authority of the church of Rome where wee are to note that more honestly than his companions hee maketh the church of Rome to differ from the Catholike church the sixth is the authority of ancient fathers the seuenth the authority of Romish schoole doctors the eighth naturall reason the ninth the authority of Philosophers the tenth the authority of writers of stories so wee see how hee buildeth his faith vpon men as well as vpon God and matcheth traditions not written with the most diuine writings of the Prophets and Apostles and conioyneth the authority of councels and fathers nay of schoolemen and Philosophers with the testimony of holy scriptures framing to vs rather an humane then a diuine foundation of Christian faith Martin Perez a plaine dealing Papist knowing that all those points of doctrine which are in controuersie betwixt his fellowes and vs are grounded rather vpon tradition then scripture doth entitle his whole discourse of these matters de traditionibus that is a discourse of traditions Finally Bellarmine lib. 2. de Pontif. Rom. cap. 31. doth call the Pope the foundation of the building of the church Fundamentum aedisicij ecclesiae and in his preface before his bookes de pontisice Rom. he saith that the seat of Peter or the Popes chaire is the approued stone the corner and pretious stone placed in the soundation of which the Prophet I say speaketh c. 8. and 28. and with him concurreth Sanders in his booke of the Rocke of the church Stapleton also declareth the matter most plainely in praefat in relect princip doctr where he saith that the foundation of the knowledge of Christian religion is necessarily placed in the authority of the Pope teaching vs in whom he saith he heareth God speaking to vs. his wordes are in hac docentis hominis authoritate he speaketh of the Pope in qua deum loquentem audimus religionis nostrae cognoscenda fundamentum necessariò pom credimus and this others must necessarily also hold for they hold him to be the supreme interpreter of scriptures and an infallible Iudge of all controuersies of religion and a law-giuer to our consciences binding all mens consciences by his lawes which is the common opinion as Bellarmine lib. 4. de Pontifice Rom. c. 16. saith of all casuistes a pitifull case therefore it is wherein the Papistes stand whose consciences are chained with so many bondes This then being found in the suruey of the grounds of Popish religion let vs also consider what conclusions may be hence inferred that we may as well suruey the conclusions as the premisses First it followeth that these grounds being blasphemous both in regard of the spirit of God which is the enditer and author of holy scriptures and also in regard of Christ Iesus the foundation of the church and finisher of our saith the doctrine and religion of Popery cannot be cleere of blasphemie for to match Popish decretales with holy scriptures and the Popes determination with Gods law is derogatory to Gods holy spirit and a plaine disparagement to Gods holy law likewise it is blasphemous to accuse the holy scriptures of insufficiencie and imperfection and to attribute more certaintie and perspicuitie to the decretales of the Pope then to the lawes of God it is also blasphemous either to remoue Christ out of the foundation of the church or at the least to ioyne the Pope with him in the foundation and that as a more necessary foundation for the knowledge of Christian religion as Stapleton saith the same also is directly contrary to the words of the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. Ephes 2. and of S. Iames. c. 4. in the first of which places we finde that no other foundation can be layd of the church but Christ Iesus in the 2. we reade that the Church is founded vpon the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ being the cheefe corner stone in the 3. we vnderstand that there is only one Law-giuer and Iudge which is able to saue and destroy it is finally very impious and blasphemous to assirme that the Pope is a more certaine and superiour Iudge then God himselfe speaking to vs in scriptures or then the Apostles and Prophets that were ledde into all truth by the spirit of God of other blasphemies of Popery
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
contulit saith the author of that donation vt in toto orbe Romani pontifices velâ—saecendotes ita hunâ— caput habeant sicut iudices regem so it appeareth that the preeminence of Roman bishops ouer all Priests proceeded from the Emperours grant and not from any ordinance of Christ or diuine authority Likewise we read that the councels of Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon were called by the authority of Emperours and that their acts and decrees were ratified by them and not by the bishops of Rome more than other bishops as is pretended Further in the confessions of faith published by those councels and receiued by Theodosius Martianâ—â—s and other Christian Emperours there is not one article of popery so much as mentioned nay albeit the bishops of Rome oppugned the decree of the councell of Chalcedon concerning the priuiledge of the Church of Constantinople yet preuailed they not lastly the condemnation of Eutyches in the councell of Chalcedon doth ouerthrow the popish reall presence of Christs body in the sacrament and transubstantiation for if Christ haue a true body that is circumscriptible solide then is not Christs body really in euery consecrated host and if that according as after the vnion of the natures both remaine so the bread and wine remaine after consecration as the fathers of that councell pretend then awaie flieth the fancy of popish transubstantiation Recaredus King of Spaine assembled the third councell of Toledo chased Arianisme out of his dominions published a confession of the faith which all Christian bishops of that countrey receiued and gouerned and confirmed the councell publico regis edicto confirmatum est concilium the councell was confirmed by publicke proclamation of the king saith the compiler of the acts of that councell finallie in all the acts there is not one article of popery confirmed but the 21. canon that alloweth Psalmes to be sung at burials doth vtterly ouerthrow dirges and masses for the dead and the doctrine of purgatory for how can they chuse but sorrow for the dead that beleeue their friends soules to be in purgatorie the 22. canon forbiddeth dances and immodest songs on holy daies the 16. canon is directed against the worship of idols the 11. canon reproueth Priests that absolue publike sinners without due acts of repentance which is an abuse very common in the masse-priests finally in this synode the Spaniard followed the rules of the Church of Constantinople and not of Rome as appeareth by the second canon Iustinian the Emperour as is reported in the law inter claras Cod. de sum Trin. published a confession of faith which he commanded to be receiued throughout his dominions but therein is not any article of popery mentioned nay diuers of his lawes concerning the ordination of bishops the ordering of Churches and other ecclesiasticall matters declare that vnto his time the gouernment of the Church belonged to kings and princes and that yet the Pope had not vsurped his generall authoritie nor excluded temporall Princes he decreed that the sacraments should be administred contrarie to the Popish forme in an audible voice and in atongue that might be vnderstood Gregory the first acknowledged himselfe subiect to the Emperour and willing to execute his commandements which sheweth that the Emperour as yet held his authority and would not yeeld it to the bishop of Rome his faith also was the same which other Emperours professed for as yet Antichrist had not gained the primacy Gregory himselfe in his epistle to Serenus of Massilia praiseth him for that hee suffered not images to be adored and no man needeth to doubt but that Maurice the Emperour concurred with him in matters of faith Leo the fourth in the chapter de capitulis dist 11. professeth that he will see the Emperours orders by all meanes kept de capitulis vel praeceptis imperialibus vestris c. irrefragabiliter custodiendis saith he quantum valuimus valemus Christe propitio nunc in aeuum nos conseruaturos modis omnibus profitemur this therefore is an argument that the christian faith as yet was maintained by the authority of the Emperours that the bishops of Rome had then made no alteration by their decretales as not hauing as yet setled their supreme and tyrannicall authority in the Church in the time of this Leo neither was transubstantiation nor the necessity of auricular confession in the Priests eare for all sinnes nor communion vnder one kind heard of Beda in the Preface of his Ecclesiasticall historie praiseth king Ceolulphus for that he heard the wordes of holy Scriptures diligently but now among papists lay-men are not commended for hearing scriptures at that time neither were the 7. sacraments confirmed nor the Popes doctrine of Purgatorie and indulgences once deliuered Irene though a semipagan Empresse and a worshipper of images yet did not giue diuine worship to the crucifix or images of the Trinitie Charles the great in a synod at Francford condemned the idolatrous decrees of the 2. Nicene synode assembled vnder Irene Ansegisus lib. 2. c. 19. sheweth that he decreed that nothing should be read in the church beside canonicall scriptures the same author reporteth diuers lawes made by him and his sonne Ludouic contrarie to the practise of the moderne Romish church Kellison therefore should worke a woonder if he could prooue that either of these Emperours beleeued that the bishop of Rome was head of the church and had both the swordes and ruled both on earth and in Purgatorie neither shall he be able to shew that they beleeued that publike seruice and sacraments were to be celebrated in a tongue not vnderstood or that those were the Apostles successors that neither preached nor administred the Sacraments Before the conuenticle of Laterane Christian kings and princes knew now what transubstantiation ment neither did they receiue the doctrine of the communion vnder one kinde before the synode at Constance in the conuenticle of Florence vnder Eugenues the 4. the doctrine of the seuen Sacraments of Purgatorie of the Popes supremacie began to be in more reputution the rest of their heresies the Pope and his complices could not procure to be authorized before the conuenticle of Trent and yet the French refused to admit the actes of that conuenticle and the Emperor Charles the fift by his agents protested against them the Queene of England king of Denmarke Princes of Germany and manie other States resolutely reiected and contemned them So we see that the doctrine of the Romish church was nener receiued by many Christian princes especially this forme of doctrine that is prescribed by the conuenticle of Trent the Popes excommunications prouisions rapines violence and tyranny we finde to haue beene of most Christian kings resisted when the Popes of Rome began to lift vp their heels against the Easterne Emperors Leo Isauricus and others and to excommunicate them they neglected their censures and in the Easterne parts were obeied as before Henry the 4. emperour of Rome
of Christ and that for the merits of the blessed virgin of Cosmas and Damianus and other saints but where such a wicked and blasphemous company as make not onely saints but also the idolatrous Masse-priests mediators for the body and blood of Christ haue beene reputed the church of Christ and was visible before these wicked missals were framed we find not in any ancient record 10. The Romish church worshippeth the crosse and the images of the Trinity with Latria or diuine worship but such a church for a thousand yeares was neuer visible in the world 11. In the missals breuiaries and other rituall bookes of the Romish church we finde diuers praiers and confessions to Angels to the virgin Mary and other saints nay to the crosse and the image giuen to Veronica and these praiers are both practised and defended by the church of Rome but if all the Popes lanterne-bearers and disciples were set to seeke for such a church in the time of the ancient fathers they should but lose their labour and spend their wits in vaine 12. The Apostles canons as is said doe excommunicate such as doe not communicate being present at the celebration of the Eucharist we may not therefore thinke that the Romish synagogue was visible in those times seeing they thinke it sufficient for their disciples to be present at the Masse although they receiue nothing 13. In the primitiue church no man euer heard that Christians gaped and gazed on the priest administring the Lords supper or that they receiued the one kinde and not the other the Popish church therefore in those times was inuisible 14. In those times also neither was the Eucharist celebrated nor the Scriptures read in tongues not vnderstood of the multitude nor did the people pray in strange toongs which they vnderstood not the missificall congregation therfore of papists which pray not knowing what they say and being present at the reading of Scriptures and celebration of Sacraments in strange tongues vnderstand nothing was not yet crept out of Cacus his denne nor apparent in the world 15. The moderne Papistes beleeue that such as in this life satisfie not for their sinnes committed after Baptisme are to satisfie for the same in Purgatorie They beleeue also that the Pope by his indulgences is able to redeeme soules out of Purgatory and to remit all the temporall paines due for sinnes but such a church as this was neuer to be seene for a thousand yeeres after Christ To abridge this discourse it were an easie matter by diuers other points of faith and diuers other customes in administring the Sacraments and diuers other formes of gouernment all newly inuented practised and maintained by the synagogue of Rome to declare and proue that the same is a new model of a church neuer seene nor knowne to antiquitie but by these few particulars the same doth most cleerely appeare already If the Papists then seeke to bring vs backe to the formes of the ancient church then must they abandon the Pope and his adherents embracing the moderne faith and doctrine of sacraments lately broched by the idle school-men and confirmed in the late conuenticle of Trent and adhere to the church of England which as it professeth the Apostles doctrine published by ancient councels of the church so it renounceth all heresies and nouclties brought in by Papists and other heretikes and as it renounceth their false doctrine so it detesteth their treacherous practises CHAP. LII That the marks of the church and motiues to the moderne Romish faith alledged by Papists may as well be alledged by heathen men and Turkes as by them AL this notwithstanding the Papists challenge to themselues the name title and authority of the church and bring foorth a whole squadron of motiues to draw simple soules to like of their sect and to intangle them with their errors Bellarmine de notis eccles c. 3. saith that the proper markes of the church are these the name of Catholikes antiquitie continuance vniuersality succession of Bishops consent in doctrine miracles prophecies temporall felicity and such like others bring vnity vniuersality holinesse of life and such like Bristow in his Motiues standeth vpon the names of Catholiks and Heretikes miracles visions scriptures traditions fathers martyrs going out rising afterward succession immutability vnitie iudges infallible obedient subiects visibility and other markes of like nature But as well may the Turkes and idolatrous heathen nations alledge these markes and motiues as the Papists and some of them doe better agree to Turkes and idolatrous Paynims then to idolatrous and hereticall Papists For as Papists call themselues Catholikes and giue the name of heretikes to others so doe the Turkes cal themselues Musulman or true beleeuers and heathen idolaters called themselues Pious worshippers of the gods and in regard of themselues both Turkes and Paynims take Christians to be impious persons and heretikes the Turkes call Papists idolaters and the heathen in time past called Christians Atheists As for antiquitie it agreeth farre better to Paynims and Turkes then to Papists for heathen idolatry was long before the doctrine of Popery and the Alcoran is more ancient then the Popes decretales that being published by Mahomet within 630. yeares after Christ these being commended and confirmed by Gregory the 9. who entred an D. 1227. 3. Idolatry as it beganne soone after the flood so it hath euer since continued the blasphemous religion of Turkes harâ— continued euer since the time of Mahomet but Popery neuer receiued a perfect forme before the conuenticle of Trent and in most places now is decaied 4. The heathen idolaters alledge for themselues amplitude and vniuersality as well as the Papists and so may the Turkes also for in time past all nations worshipped idoles faue the Iewes and in our times farre more nations are deluded by Mahomet and his priests then by the Pope and his Masse-priests the Popes doctrine being confined within a few nations of Europe Mahometisme poslessing the greatest part of Asia and Afrike and no small parts of Europe 5. The Turkes euer since Mahomet haue had a succession of Caliphaes and priests and among the heathen there neuer wanted a discent of sacrificing idolaters but the Papists cannot deriue their succession from the Apostles eitheir in doctrine or discent of Popes for neither is their doctrine apostolicall nor are the Popes the Apostles successors beside that they are vncerteine both who were true Popes and which succeded after Peter and diuers bishops and Popes of Rome 6. The Paynims with one consent in time past worshipped idoles neither did any one among them call the matter in question the Turks are so resolute in religion that they will haue no disputing against any point of their doctrine but Popish schoolemen call all points of their religion in question neither doe they so well agree in any article but there be some that hold singular opinions the Scotists differ from the Thomistes and diuers opinions are holden by
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
Apostles he shall declare himselfe to want both head and braine for in the Canticles c. 2. and Ephes 5. the title of spouse of the church is declared to belong to Christ and him only the scriptures declare to be head of the Church Gregory lib. 4. ep 38. ad Ioan. Constantinopol sheweth that neither Paul nor Andrew nor Iohn nor Peter was the head of the vniuersall church but all members of the church vnder one head The Prophets and Apostles doe teach vs that the church of God consisteth of sheepe and lambes and such was Peter commanded to feede God saith by his Prophet Isay c. 11. that there shall be no hurting nor killing in all his holie mountaine and that the wolfe shall dwell with the lambe and the pard he with the kidde but the Romish Church is full of blood and wholy vpholden by cruelty in France the Pope and his complices haue caused aboue two hundred thousand persons to be murdered for the profession of the true faith the fires and butchers axes of their executioners haue consumed also infinit Christians in Italy Spaine England Scotland Germany and the Low countries very ignorant therefore he is of the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles that supposeth that the massacring Romish church is founded vpon the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets The Prophet Daniel doth prophecy how a certaine king shall arise that shall speake words of blasphemy against the most high and consume his Saints and that shall thinke that he may change times and lawes the Apostle also 2. Thess 2. sheweth that there shall come a departing and that the man of sinne shall be disclosed and exalt himselfe against all that is called God and that he shall sit in the temple of God S. Iohn also in his Apocalypse sheweth that Antichrist shall rise after the decay of the Roman Empire and giue life to that state and that the great whore shall sit vpon the seuen hils and haue her garments died red in the blood of Saints but this argueth that the Pope is Antichrist and that Popish religion is not Christian religion grounded vpon the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets but rather Antichristian heresie founded vpon the Popes decretales and schoolemens fond and foolish inuentions Finallie it is not only desperate ignorance but also meere madnesse to affirme that the grounds doctrines heresies and blasphemies which before we haue spoken of are deriued out of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles would Kellison the Popes grand surueier vndertake to prooue vnto vs all the Popes traditions concerning the Masse the dirges and offices for the dead purgatory indulgences holy water holy candles paschal lambes rascall Friers and Monkes and such like trash by the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets he should but lose his labour and percase his wits too for in their diuine writings such fond superstitious and impious doctrines haue no defence nor shelter but if hee meane to find their true beginning then must he search the Popes decretales the writings of schoolemen and canonists and other the Popes adherents and there he shall not only find out the first authours but also the rest of the nouelties fooleries and impieties of the synagogue of Satan CHAP. XIII That poperie was either condemned or not knowen by Kings and Princes professing Christian religion in old time THe Popes Agents when they are vpon their owne dunghils and among their owne disciples and fauorers doe make great crackes as if the Popish religion which is now taught at Rome were the only religion professed by ancient kings princes and emperors of Rome that made profession of the Christian faith but who so list to read the ancient confessions of Christian kings and the lawes made by them both for mainteinance of the Christian faith and for the repressing of diners errors shall finde that the grounds doctrines impieties absurdities of Popery were either disallowed by them or vnknowen vnto them The first Christian king of Britaine if we may beleeue Bede and others of latter times for in more auncient histories there is no record of such a king or such matters as then passed was Lucius but we doe not finde that the Popish Masse was then hatched or that Eleutherius bishop of Rome pretended the vniuersall monarchy of the Church nay wee read that Irenaeus doth make as great account of other churches as of Rome albeit the same be first placed in regard of the splendour and authority of that citie furthermore Lucius neither had images nor worshipped them nor did he giue Latria to the crosse of Purgat one and indulgences he could not heare any thing for that Eleutherius as yet tooke not vpon him to deliuer soules out of Purgatory nor to grant pardons a poena culpa finally if Kellison seeke to prooue the articles of Popery before mentioned by the testimony of Lucius you shall soone see that the man will be at a stand The first Christian Emperour of Rome was Constantine the great but many actes of his declare that he was neither a slaue of the bishop of Rome nor a professor of Popery for first by his authority both was the councell of Nice assembled and the actes thereof established as Enschius in vita Constantini and other ecclesiasticall writers doe testifie secondly that faith which the councell of Nice published he professed but therein is not one article of Popery established but rather diuers refuted as namely the doctrine of Papists concerning Christs humanitie and the Popish reall presence and dissoluing priests mariages for if Christ be true man then is not his body inuisible and impalpable in the Sacrament againe if Christs body be ascended into heauen then is not the same in euery pixe if the same be to come from heauen then is not the same to creepe out of a pixe if mariage of Priests be honorable and not to be dissolued as was decreed in the counceil of Nice by the aduice of Paphnutius then doe the Papists teach doctrines of diuels that condemne such mariages and separate Priests from their wiues thirdly all the actes of that councell were confirmed and not only receiued by Constantine but that sheweth that the Bishop of Rome then had no more authoritie in his prouince then the Bishop of Alexandria in his as the sixth canon of the Nicene councell testifieth the 4. canon sheweth that the Bishop of Rome had no greater authority in ordeining bishops then other metropolitans the fifth canon equalleth his power in excommunication to that which other Bishops had to abridge this matter we finde that the Bishops of Rome were as well subiect to the canons of the councell of Nice as other Bishops finally we finde that Constantine made lawes for church gouernment in his time and not the Bishops of Rome Nay the bishops of Rome as is said in the counterfet donation of Constantine had their priuileges from Constantine and not contrariwise priuilegium Romanae ecclesiae pontifici
say as much and greatly complaineth of Roman Caursins and vsurers Are not then our moderne Papists simple to continue vnder the gouernment of Antichrist where they are pilled both aliue and dead and spoiled by diuers fraudes and brought to extreme pouerty through manifold oppressions and exactions CHAP. XLI That the Popish church hath no true Bishops nor Priests THe gouernment of the Popish church being so burdensome and dangerous cannot well be tolerated by rules of policy but if the same be against both scriptures and canons of the church then as repugnant both to religion and Christian policy it is to be abandoned of all Christian common-wealthes let vs then consider what allowance it may haue either of scriptures or ancient canons The Apostle Act. 20. saith that the holy ghost hath appointed Bishops to gouerne the Church of God in quo vos spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos regere ecclesiam dei saith he speaking of the Bishops of Asia but the popish church hath no true Bishops and that is prooued first for that bishops cannot be orderned but by true Bishops but the prelats of the Romish church are ordeined by the Pope that is no Bishop the proposition is granted of the assumption the first part is not denied in the second part our aduersaties insist firmely and affirme the Pope to be a true bishop but how can he be a Bishop that neither preacheth nor can preach nor administreth the Sacraments nor succeedeth the Apostles in their Apostolicall office the Apostle 1. Tim. 3. sheweth that the office of a bishop consisteth in the worke and not in the title qui Episcopatum desiderat bonum opus desiderat Secondly antichrist can ordeine no true bishops but that the Pope is antichrist I haue declared in my fist booke de Pontif. Rom. and it is apparent in that he teacheth doctrine contrary to that which we haue receined from Christ Iesus and is plainly described in the Reuelation by the whoore of Babylon Apocalyps 17. and by the beast like a lambe rising out of the earth Apocalyps 13. which are figures of Antichrist Thirdly none but the successors of Christs apostles can ordaine true bishops but the Pope succeedeth Iulius Caesar rather then Simon Peter for Simon Peter fed Christs flocke he murdreth Christs lambes Fourthly neither heretikes nor simoniacall persons haue power to ordeine bishops as the master of the sentences lib. 4. dist 25. prooueth by the authoritie of Cyprian Innocent the first and Leo. and this is the practise of the Romish church at this day who refuseth to allow them for bishops that are ordred by such as they repute heretikes or schismatikes some determine otherwise but they repugne against the Romish churches practise Finally no woman can ordeine bishops but Pope Ioan was a woman and therefore all ordeined by her and their successors are no bishops by the confession of the aduersaries themselues Howsoeuer it is the Papists cannot assure themselues that they haue any bishops for no man is ordeined bishop vnlesse he that ordeined him had an intention to order him a bishop but of this intention no man can assure himselfe Furthermore the Popish synagogue hath no true priests for their priests are all ordred to sacrifice for quicke and dead The forme of priesthood say the Masse-priests assembled at Florence is this accipe potestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vinis mortuis and this is prooued also by their rituall bookes and by Bellarmines confession lib. deord c. 9. but such priests were neuer appointed by Christ or his Apostles neither is there any footestep of such an ordination to be found in ancient fathers Secondly no true priests can be ordeined by other then true bishops and the Apostles successors but such bishops the synagogue of Rome wanteth Lastly true priests and ministers of the Gospell are ordeined to preach Gods word truely and to administer the Sacraments sincerely but popish priests are not ordered to this end If then that cannot be the church that wanteth priests and bishops then are we not to looke for the true church among the papists but Hierome in dialog contr Lucifer denieth that to be the church that hath no priests and Cyprian lib. 4. epist 9. teacheth that the church is a people or flocke vnited to the bishop Againe if all the ordination of bishops and priests in the Romish church dependeth vpon the Pope and the Pope be not mentioned either Ephes 4. or 1. Cor. 12. where all the ministers of the church giuen to the same by Christ are mentioned then doth the ordination of Roman priests and prelates take his beginning not from Christ but from Antichrist Lastly if the function of masse-priests doth consist in saying Masse and the Masse be prooued to be an humane inuention then is the Romish priesthood an humane inuention but otherwhere we haue sufficiently declared that the Masse was by little and little peeced togither and is a meere humane inuention nay an inuention contrarie to Christs institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist CHAP. XLII That Popery cannot be mainteined without forgery and falshood THis point of it selfe alone would require a large discourse if we should prosecure particularly and distinctly whatsoeuer our aduersaries haue herein offended for whether we respect the diuers kinds of forgeries or the places of authors forged and falsified by them it were a great worke to comprehend them all we will therefore choose out some few examples out of many whereby all true Christians may haue cause sufficient to suspect them in the rest First then we charge them with falsity for that as much as in them lieth they haue gone about to suppresse Gods eternall word comprised in the old and new testament that this is falsitie it is apparent by the law qui testamentum ff ad legem corneliam de falsis for by that law they are condemned qui testamentū amouerint celauerint that is which shall amooue or conceile a testament but the Pope and his complices forbid expressely all translations of the new testament made by our doctors and only grant certaine translations made by themselues and that with hard conditions as is declared in the index of forbidden bookes reg 3. and 4. but publikely they will not haue scriptures red in vulgar tongues Secondly they burne the holy scriptures vnder pretense of false translations but the law formerly cited doth pronounce him a falsarie that shall abolish or cancell or burne a mans testament the words of the law are these si quis testamentum deleuerit that is if any shall cancell a testament Thirdly it is falsity to cancell or breake the seales of a testament as the practise of the law of this land declareth how then can the Popish synagogue of Rome excuse it selfe that depriueth the lords people of the cup which our sauiour Christ calleth the new testament in his blood is not this all one as if the same should breakē the seales of Gods testament
and that none taught in those countries beside S. Peter and such as he sent a lie directly repugnant to Scriptures which testifie that S. Paul preached in those countries being appointed by God thereto and not by man and refuted by diuers ancient histories and fathers who write that diuers others preached there beside S. Peters priests and messengers S. Augustine epist 162. sheweth that the Gospel came into Aphrike out of other countries then those that belonged to the church of Rome Gregory the 4. c. in praeceptis dist 12. saith that all bishops causes and the discussing of matters of religion belongeth to the See of Rome and that religion tooke her beginning from thence a matter apparantly false for religion began at Hierusalem and not at Rome and Councels in ancient time determined the differents in causes of Religion and not the bishop of Rome who was as well subiect to the decision of the general councell as other bishops Anacletus c. in nouo dist 21. saith that the rest of the Apostles made Peter their Prince which is contradicted by the Papistes themselues that deriue Peters authoritie from Christ. Nicolas dist 22. c. omnes telleth vs that Christ gaue to Peter the right of the kingdome both of heduen and earth but of this earthly kingdome belonging to Peter this is the first man that euer told newes Anacletus dist 22. c. sacrosancta affirmeth that both Peter and Paul were crowned with martyrdome in one day and at the some time but this leasing is refuted by Prudentius peri stephan Hymno 12. Arator in act Apost lib. 2. Augustine serm 18. de sanctis and others Innocent the 4. c. ad apostolicae de sent re iudicat affirmeth that Sicily is the speciall patrimony of Peter est speciale patrimonium Petri. but no where doe were reade where either Christ gaue or Peter claimed this patrimony Clement the fifth c. Romani Clem. de iureiurando most boldly and impudently writeth that Emperors hauing the crowne set vpon their heads sweare fealty to the Pope a matter certes which Bellarmine the Popes proctor would blush to affirme for albeit he would willingly gratifie the Pope whith any thing yet dare he not say that the Roman Empire is holden in fee of the Pope and thus the Popes runne on headlong heaping priuileges on Rome and building the tower of Babel by lies The same is also practised by Bellarmine as I haue shewed in diuers discourses written against him by Baromus as my speciall exceptions taken to his volumes fraught with lies and fables do declare by Parsons and Kellison as by my answeres to their bookes it may appeare Turrecremata lib. 3. sum c. 9. affirmeth that Helena and 3000. Iewes were conuerted to Christian religion in a councell at Rome vnder Siluester but other more true stories report that she was alwares a Christian and holpe to conuert her sonne Constantine Lib. 2. sum c. 300. he saith that Paul did some things which he afterward retracted quaedam fecit quae postea reuocauit The Emperor Henry the fourth by the Romanists is most vniustly standred as if he had prostituted his owne wife to his sonne and done other such like abominable actes matters merely deuised by the Popes agents Fridericke the 2. was a most noble Prince and greatly praised by the Cardinall of Cusa Aegidius Romanus and others yet was he most vniustly reuiled and standred by Gregory the 9. Innocent the 4. and their agents as it doth appeare by the testimony of Matthew Paris in Henrico 3. Capgraue telleth how a hundred and fifty of Ioseph of Arimathaea his company sailed out of France into great Britany vpon Iosephes shirt a small barge certes for so many passengers Antoninus hist part 3. reporteth how an innumerable troupe of the order of Dominske were seene in heauen couered vnder the blessed virgins gowne Stapleton in his prompruarie dominica 2. aduentus brocheth vs a barrell of lies first he saith that Sebastian a certeine musician was put in prison for demaunding liberty of conscience by the last Queene and that one Gifford was imprisoned by her likewise for the same cause after he had enterteined the Queene very bountifully at his house and that Shelley was committed for presenting a request in the behalfe of the papists matters meerely imagined and deuised by lying companions and foolishly reported by him the two first we cannot learne euer to haue beene committed the third was imprisoned for plaine treason The Papists accused the people of Zuricke for teaching that the virgine Mary had more sonnes then one and that Iames died for them as we may reade in Sleidan lib. hist. 4. and Bellarmine lib. 4. de iustific c. 1. saith we little regard good works and lib. 2. de amiss grat c. 1. he accuseth the Albrgians as they are called and Caluin for holding the error of the Manichecs which they alwaies renounced and detested In his boâ—ke de Matrimonio c. 2. he blusheth not to charge them whom he calleth Lutherans and Caluinists with holding that matrimonie is not of God a point expresly denied by them Finally it is an easie matter to shew that the foundation of Popery is laid vpon lies and that the charge which Papistes giue vpon their aduersaries is ordinarily enforced by most wicked imputations and standers CHAP. XLIIII That the cause of Popery is mainteined by fire and sword MVch are simple people abused by calumniations deuised against good men and hardly are Christians able to discerne falshood from truth and to iudge what is truely alledged what falsly vntill such time as matters be duly examined yet neither can trueth be vtterly suppressed nor do lies passe alwaies for good paiment Those therefore whom they cannot abuse with lies and false allegations the Pope and his complices seek cruelly to destroy with fire and sword The holy Ghost Apocalyps 17. sheweth vs that the purple whoore should be drunke with the blood of the saints and Apocalyp 13. that the 2. beast should kill such as would not worship the image of the beast that is that the Pope should persecute to the death such as would not submitte themselues to the kingdome of Antichrist in which the image of the Roman Empire was after a sort reuiued and this wee see verified by experience in the cruell gouernement of the Popes of Rome and their adherents Their lawes against all such as dissent from them in opinion concerning the sacraments are most rigorous they are degraded and deliuered ouer to the secular power to be burned as it appeareth by the law ad abolendam de haereticis nay they punish such as are suspected if they cannot cleere themselues with no lesse rigor then the rest all that communicat with them receiue them or succor them are in great danger such as giue them counsell are reputed infamous as is determined c. si aduersus de haereticis the goods of heretikes are adiudged confiscate neither are they punished only while they liue but also