we bring all ReligioÌ„ into contempt But how prooueth hee that wee contemne the Churches authoritie First he sayth it is a maxime and almoste an article of fayth among vs that the true Church which once was hath erred grossely and in no lesse matters then fayth justification merit free-will workes satisfaction Purgatory prayer to Sayntes worship of Images number vertue of Sacraments sacrifice and such like But if hee meane the whole Catholique Church this is neither article nor maxime nor opinion of ours that the whole Church hath erred grossely If he meane the Pope and his adherents and parasites why should not they erre as well as the Churches of Antioch Alexandria Hierusalem and Constantinople That they haue indeed erred we haue already prooued and offer our selues alwayes ready to prooue and it is most apparant for that their Doctrine is not only diuers but also contrary to the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles and namely in the points aboue specified Next hee sayth Luther cared not for a thousand Churches and Caluin Beza and others despised all the Councels and ancient Fathers But neyther the contempt of the Synagogue of Rome nor the reiection of diuers Conuenticles assembled by Popes nor the refusall of diuers counterfet Bookes alledged vnder the name of Fathers or of some Fathers singuler opinions doth argue anye contempt of the true Church or of lawfull councelles or of the authenticall writinges and common Doctrines of Fathers Further I would haue thought that reason might haue taught him talking so long of Religion that priuate mens sayinges and opinions should not so often haue beene imputed generally to vs or to the whole Church To prooue that contempt of the Churches authoritie bringeth Religion into contempt hee alleadgeth that wee cannot knowe which is Scripture which not but by the voice of the Church But first this is nothing to vs which doe much esteeme the authoritie of the Apostolike and Catholike Church We say also that euerie priuate man is to reuerence the iudgement of the true Church But what is this to the Romish synagogue that is not the true church againe what is this to the Pope that is an oppressor of the church and an enemie of Christian Religion if Kellison wil contend that the sentence of the Pope which neither vnderstandeth nor percase can reade Scriptures in the originall tongues must needes be followed in deciding the controuersies about Canonical scriptures his owne schollers wil laugh at him that maketh a betilheaded fellow iudge in matters of religion a blinde man iudge of colours If he refer men to the particular church of Rome that now is it will bee said that she cannot bee iudge and partye and that the auncient Church is much to bée preferred before her Saint Augustine wee confesse among manye other reasons was enduced also to beleeue by the churches authoritie So likewise are many more then he But K. remooueth all other reasons and motiues in matter of discerning scriptures and maketh his moderne Church a necessarie cause and almost sole motife of faith as if none were to beleeue eyther scriptures or any other Article of faith vnlesse hee bee resolued by the Pope and the moderne Church of Rome Blasphemously also hee affirmeth that the Romaine Church being contemned wee can no more assure a man of Scripture then of a Robin-hoodes tale But to vse these comparisons is blasphemye To make so much of nothing and to stand so much vpon a blinde Pope and to preferre the Romaine moderne Church before the auncient and all other moderne churches is foolery In the fourth Chapter he beareth his Reader in hand that wee reject some bookes of Canonicall Scripture and for proofe saith that Luther reiected the Booke of Iob Ecclesiastes and all the Gospels saue that of Iohn and that we reiect the Bookes of Iudith Tobia Ecclesiasticus Wisdome and the Machabees But these latter Bookes hee shall neuer prooue to be canonicall vnlesse wée take the Canon largelye as Saint Augustine sometimes seemeth to doe S. Hierome in prol galeato Athanasius in Synops Gregorius Nazianzenus in carminibus Epiphanius in lib. de pond mensur and the moste and best Fathers esteeme of them no otherwise then we doe The calumniation concerning Luther wee haue answered already But saith K. they will needes receiue Scripture at the Roman Churches hand And of this hee would inferre that as well we ought to follow that Church in the number of bookes as in receiuing canonicall Scripture vpon that Churches warrant This sâ—ith hee but hee taketh that for graunted that no man yeeldeth him For wee take the Scriptures as the Church of Rome her selfe did from the Prophets and Apostles We doe also assure our selues that the iudgement of the Apostolike Church is farre to be preferred before the iudgement of the Apostaticall moderne Romish Church Lastlye wee answere to his argument that wee haue diuers arguments to assure vs of the authoritie truth and number of canonicall bookes of Scriptures beside the testimony of any one particular Church as for example the testimony of Scripture it selfe the likenesse Maiestie antiquitie truth stile of Scripture and such like In the fift chapter he endeuoreth to prooue that our dissensions in Religion doe open a gappe to contempt of Religion And thereupon talketh his pleasure of Caluinistes and Lutherans Puritanes Protestants soft and rigid Lutherians Zuinglians Bezites Anabaptistes Libertines Brownistes Martinistes family of loue and damned crew But first the damned crew is by vs damned In this late conspiracie of Papists Edward Baynham that is knowne to bee of the damned crewe was choson for a fit maÌ„ to goe as nuntio from this damned crew to the Pope Anabaptistes Libertines the family of loue are more among the Papists then among vs. We say to them anathema maranatha The Brownistes and Martinistes wee generally condemne The rest are the names of slaunder deuised by Papistes To answere his obiection therefore wee say that the Churches of Germanye France and other countries doe well agree and priuate men doe submitte themselues to the determination of a free generall councell and in the meane while to their nationall Churches The groundes of his sixt chapter are laide vpon the Popes head-ship For because wee want a visible head hee supposeth wee giue great aduantage to Atheistes But as the Popes headship is a matter rather fancied then prooued out of Scriptures or Fathers so what so euer is thereupon built the same is founded vpon fancie and not worth a head of Garlike That Saint Peter did rule both the Apostles and all the church as Christes vicar generall and head of the Church it cannot bee prooued All the Apostles were called alike and sent to teach and administer the Sacraments alike They had also the keyes of the Church giuen to them by one ioynt commission and Paul professeth that the principall of the Apostles gaue vnto him nothing But had Peter had any such monarchy as is
vnlesse he will haue both a building without a foundation and a foundation beside the building Fourthly it is an absurd course to separate the power of the Church and the persons in whome the same consisteth from the Church Fiftly what more ridiculous then to call a forme of proceeding a principle of Christian Doctrine Sixtly all Articles of the faith may be called heads but it is meere foppery to thinke that Christian Religion hath as many foundations as seuerall Articles Finally it is moste absurde to beleeue that eyther the Pope or the Church of Rome doth interpret scriptures infallibly or hath the power to adde Articles not contained in Scriptures to the Christian faith If then Stapletons meaning be that all traditions not written and all interpretations of the Pope and his adherents and all the Popes determinations and decretales and the sayings of the fathers and Councels allowed by the Pope are the foundations of faith then doth he endeuor to build Babylon not Hierusalem fantasticall deuises and monstrous chimeraes and not the true faith the kingdome of Antichrist and not Christes church Nay if these were foundations of faith then would it follow First that the foundation of the Romish faith is not yet fully laide For as yet all their decretales and determinations are not fully published Secondly we should not know where to finde this faith these traditions and interpretations and opinions of Fathers all of them being not yet resolued Thirdly the Romish faith should be a meere humane deuise standing vpon humane fancies Finally it should be contrary to it selfe and to scriptures for such are the Romish traditions and interpretations and allegations of fathers Canus in his Booke de Locis Theologicis layeth downe ten groundes from whence all arguments in controuersies of Diuinitie in his opinion are deriued The first is holy Scripture The 2. traditiō The 3. is the authoritie of the Catholik church The 4. is the authority of general councels The 5. is the authoritie of the Church of Rome The 6. is the authoritie of the holy Fathers The 7. is the authoritie of Schoolemen Canonists The 8. is naturall reason The 9. is the authoritie of Philosophers and ciuill lawyers The last is the authoritie of humane histories But first it is no smal wrong to ioyne with holy scriptures not onely the writing of Fathers but also the writings of Schoolemen canonists and profane writers Secondly it is the ouerthrowe of faith to found the same vppon vncertaine and vnknowne traditions Thirdly it appeareth heereby that the faith of Papists for the moste part is an humane opinion being grounded vpon men nay vpon humane reason Finally his groundes are not onely changeable for the moste part but also contrarie one to another That is prooued not onely by the mutability of the decrees of councels Doctrine of councels Schoole-diuines Canonists and prophane authors but also by traditions themselues of which diuers are abrogated and ceased This may be demonstrated by traditions by testimonies of Fathers actes of Councels the doctrine of Thomistes and Scotistes Canonists ciuill Lawyers and profane writers For not onely profane writers haue shewed themselues ignorant of matters of faith but both Schoolemen and fathers haue held contrarie opinions as shall be prooued when neede is by diuers particulars Bellarmine in his Preface in lib. de pont Rom. is not ashamed to apply these words of the Prophet Isay Behold I will put a Stone in the foundation of Sion vnto the pope There also hee auoucheth the Sea of Rome to bee the foundation of the Faith Likewise in the end of his preface de verbo dei he seemeth to holde that the sence of Scriptures is to be fetched from the Popes See and sencelesse decretales Lastly the same man doth as confidently alleadge the Pope decretales as Saint Paules Epistles Gelasius in the Chapter Sancta dist 15. ordeineth that the Histories of Martyrs and their sufferings are to bee receiued And commonly the Romish Church doth prooue her traditions partly out of such legends and partly out of their missals porteses and other rituall Bookes Kellison therefore when he looketh vpon the ruinous foundations of the Romish faith hath little reason to talke against the foundations of our Christian faith For First we all agree that the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are the principles and foundations of our faith and thus both Scriptures and Fathers doe teach vs. But the Papists as may appeare by that which I haue alleadged doe one differ from another Canus doth not once mention the Pope among his theologicall places which to Stapleton and Bellarmine is the principall foūdation of the worke Contrarywise Stapleton leaueth Scriptures out of his reckoning of principles of faith which Canus confesseth to be a moste solide foundation of faith Canus againe numbreth diuers foundations and places theologicall which others doe not once mention Secondly albeit we doe not build our faith principallye eyther vpon the actes of councels or testimonies of Fathers further then they build their Doctrine vpon holy Scriptures yet in the interpretatiō of Scriptures wee doe not neglect the authoritie of councels and Fathers But the Papists albeit they seeme to found their faith vpon the authoritie of councels and Fathers yet regard them not one straw if it be the popes pleasure to determine contrarie vnto them Thirdly our faith is built vpon the rocke Christ Iesus but the faith of the Romanists is built vppon the straw and stubble of popish traditions determinations and as they say vpon the Pope who to them is the supreme iudge and pole-starre of faith shining out of his papall Chaire Fourthly our faith is the Christian faith being built onely vpon the word of God Theirs is a decretaline an humane faith being built vpon the Popes decretales and humane inuentions Fiftly our groundes are immoouable and agree well one with an other But their groundes are mutable and contrary one to another Sixtly they cannot deny our groundes vnlesse they will blaspheme against holy Scriptures But vpon their owne groundes they are not yet well agreed We doe generally refuse them and antiquity was ignorant of them Seuenthly our groundes are safe and sure But he that foloweth the Pope or beleeueth all that is written in the Breuiaryes and Missals cannot assure him felfe that he is in the right Finally it is a thing most ridiculous to beleeue that whatsoeuer an vnlearned Pope or a man voyd of religion determineth in matters of fayth is to be holden as a matter and firme Article of fayth For as well may a blind man iudge of colours as a blind and irreligious Pope of matters of religion But we are assured that the Prophets and Apostles haue truly declared vnto vs the whole counsaile of God Open your eyes therfore deere Christians and suffer not your selues to be abused by the impostures of Masse-priestes You see they are not resolued in the foundations of fayth And doe you
and Sodomites teach rebellion murder of Princes periurie equiuocations and diuers other pointes of Doctrine repugnant both to Religion and ciuill pollicy In the first Chapter of his 8. Booke hee affirmeth Kellisons calumniatitions as if our doctrine sauored of Atheisme refuted that certaine poyntes of our Doctrine open a gappe to a deniall of the diuine Majesty But when hee commeth to particulars hee powreth out of his wide mouth a streame of impudent slaunders First hee saith wee are not afrayd to auouch that God is the author of all sinne and wickednesse and that he hath ordained vs to sinne from all eternitie that wee sinne by Gods will and commaundement and that he vrgeth vs to sinne And concludeth that wee make God cruell and tyrannicall as commaunding vs that which wee cannot performe wanting free-will and punishing vs for faultes which wee cannot auoyde But first hee doth not so much as offer to prooue his charge eyther out of the Doctrine of the Chuch of England or out of any mans wrightinges whose name is of any note in our Church Nay hee knoweth wee teach contrarie to that which he imputeth vnto vs. May he not then be ashamed to charge his aduersaries with matters so false and improbable Secondly hee is neither able to conuince Maister Caluin of any such impious Doctrine nor hath he reason to make so greate clamours if anye one priuate man of our teachers should hold any point of erroneous Doctrine Lastly before hee come at his conclusion hee must make better proofe of his premisses if he meane to haue the particulars of his suruey to passe without censure He must also vnderstand that albeit we haue not freewil or liberium arbitrium in discerning the thinges of God and dooing thinges pleasing to his diuine Maiestie it followeth not that God is therefore cruell or tyrannicall because by our owne default we became vnable to performe the Lawe and blinde in discerning matters tending to eternall life The rest of the first Chapter containeth a long inuectiue against Atheistes and certaine weake arguments brought to prooue that there is a God But as in the first hée toucheth his owne fellowes so in the second hee confirmeth them in their Atheisme being able to bring no better arguments to confute them and in the whole behaueth himselfe fondly and vnlearnedly First hee saith that neither reason nor faith nor both together are able to discouer what God is But therein hee discouereth by his owne confession that hee is a poore Surueyor of Religion not knowing what God is and a silly Doctor of Diuinitie if hee deny that Scriptures teach vs what God is as farre as is necessarie for vs to know Pag. 642. he saith that creatures in God are increate infinite perfect and that all of them in God are God Which assertion first taketh away the distinction betwixt God and creatures Next aduanceth creatures to a diuine being And thirdly commeth neere to Seruetus his impiety For if a creature in God is God why may not Kellison also say that God in a stone is a stone and in Iron Iron as Seruetus did if Bellarmine in praefat ante tom 1. disput say truly Neither can it excuse him that God foresawe and foreknew all thinges and as Philosophers say had ideaes in him For this deuise of ideaes is a Philosophical fancy and yet cannot make Kellisons assertion good seeing the platonicall philosophers distinguish ideaes from the thinges them-selues and make them separate from them Pag. 645. he talketh of conuincing a God-head and sayth that the world by Philosophers is called Alle. But the first speech is impious seeming to import that he meaneth to ouercome God and to confute him as hee hath alredy endeuored to confute his truth The second proceedeth of ignorance For hardly will hee bee able to shew in what tongue Philosophers call the world Alle. Pag. 648. he belyeth Caesar where hee maketh him say that the first inhabitants of England sprang out of the earth as herbes or Toad-stooles Caesar in his commentaryes talketh neyther of hearbes nor Toad-stooles and vtterly reiecteth this falshood Pag. 649. he would gladly prooue that there is a God by the conuulsions of men possessed And pag. 650. by Witches Hee sayth also that such as are possessed by Deuils somtimes howle like Dogges somtime yell like Wolfes But his argumentes from Witches and possessed with Deuils prooue the Deuill rather then God Secondly his proofes are weake being drawne rather from illusions and counterfet trickes then from matters euidently true Lastly it is hard to be beleeued that he hath heard any that eyther howled like Dogges or yelled like Wolfes These proofes therfore are liker to draw men to infidelitye then otherwise Afterward he talketh idlely of the heauy and lumpish nature of the earth an element as it seemeth predominant in him of the Common-wealth of Bees so well ordered that a Statist may learne policy from it as he beleeueth of the leapes of Hares of Foxes and Fearne bushes of Spiders and spider-webs and such like vaine and idle similitudes But what should I follow or runne after him that runneth so farre not onely from his argument but from himselfe also In the second chapters rubrike he affirmeth that our Doctrine ruineth al Religiō But in the Chapter it selfe there is no ground brought for proofe of his assertiō Only in the latter end he doth afresh charge vs with holding that God is the author of all sinne And thereof concludeth that those which beleeue this must needes haue cold hearts in Religion But we haue declared his antecedent to be false and fantasticall What then shall we need to beat downe his ruinous consequent The rest of this Chapter containeth diuers poyntes of popish Doctrine cōcerning Gods true worshippe Heretikes and their markes Christes honor Priestes an sacrifices succession vnity vniuersality here idelye repeated and formerly refuted Pag. 671. he beareth vs in hand that the moderne Romish Religion is most conformable to the Doctrine planted by the Apostles But he shall not be able to prooue all his life halfe of that which he hath affirmed in one line He saith he hath prooued it in his commentaries in secunda secūda But his proofes are weake and therefore dare not abide the light If he come forth with his proofes of his Religion heerafter we will pray him also to shew that the Romish Doctrine of blowing vp Princes and Parliament-houses with Gun-powder of breaking of oathes of lying and equiuocating of the Popes vniuersall Monarchye of kissing the Popes Pantoufle of iustification by confirmation extreme vnction Mariage and orders ex opere operato of taking Christ with the teeth of transubstantiation halfe communions priuate Masses prayer in a tongue not vnderstoode worship of Saintes and Angels and the rest of those Popish Heresies which we refuse are conformable to that Religion which was first planted by the Apostles In the third Chapter hee affirmeth that in contempt of the Churches authority
periure them-selues in their resolutions of cases of consciene teach them how to equiuocate to frustrate othes And the Pope commaundeth his followers to break their othes giuen to Princes by him excommunicate vppon paine of damnation God commaundeth subiects to obey Kinges and Children to honor Parents The Pope commaundeth them to Rebell and take armes against such as he excommunicateth and willeth Children to be exequutioners of their Fathers by his inquisitors being falsely iudged Heretikes God forbiddeth murder adultery fornication theft false witnessing and concupiscence The Pope promiseth heauen to murderers of Princes and to Gun-powder Traytors permitteth common stewes receiueth the hyre of Whores commaundeth all his followers to spoyle such as by him are most vniustly excommunicated by lyes and forgeryes maintayneth his vsurped Monarchy and determineth in the conuenticle of Trent that concupiscence is no sinne in the regenerate Can we then doubt whether Papistes be Atheistes Fiftly none but Atheistes eyther take to themselues diuine honor or giue the same to creatures But the Pope c. satis dist 96. taketh to himselfe the name of God In the first Booke of Ceremonies c. 7. hee applyeth to himselfe the honor that is proper to Christ saying All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth In c. quoniam de immunitate in 6. he claymeth to be the spouse of the Church His flattering parasites call him a God on the earth and our Lord God the Pope and such like tearmes as may bee prooued by the testimonie of Felin in c. ego N. de iureiurando and by the glosse in c. cum inter non nullos extr de verb. signif Thomas Waldensis a man much esteemed by Stapleton in prolog Tom. 1. doct fid thus cryeth out to Pope Martin Lord saue vs wee perish Simon Begnius in concil later sess 6. calleth Leo the x. the Lion of the tribe of Iuda and a Sauiour Ecce venit Leo de tribu Iuda saith he And againe te Leo beatissime saluatoreÌ„ expectauimus The same may also be prooued by infinite other testimonies Sixtly Atheistes they are that make a mocke of Christian Religion But this is a common crime of Popes and Papistes for commonly they vse wordes of Scripture to make sport withall As did Bonâ—face the 8. casting ashes into Prochetus his eyes and turning these wordes memento homo quod cinis es into a iest They also say that Christ may be eaten of Hogges and Dogges and hang him vpon euerie Altar Gregory the 7. cast him into the fire When the Pope rideth abroade he sendeth his God of past among the baggage and scullery When their Saints doe not answere their desires they cast them into the water and rayle on them Seauenthly not contenting themselues with Christian Religion they haue forged diuers new Relgions and place more perfection in them then in Christian Religion Vnto S. Francis they giue the title of figuratiue Iesus and say that the order of S. Dominicke is protected vnder our Ladyes gowne in heauen all which be trickes of Atheisme Eightly the worship of Angels and Saintes is confirmed with infinite lies and most ridiculous fables redde publikely in popish Churches And yet no man alloweth them but such as make mockes at Religion Ninthly it is playne Atheisme to deuise new worships of God For Christians haue but one God and one worship of God prescribed in his word It is also atheisme to violate Christes institution in his Sacraments But Papists haue deuised diuers new formes in worshipping of God by Masses prayers to saints incensing of images leading about Asses carying of palmes and infinite such like ceremonies They haue also deuised new Sacraments and made them equal to baptisme and the Lords Supper Vnto bapisme they haue added chrisme salt spittle light From Christes supper they haue taken the Cuppe They haue abolished bread and wine Of a Sacrament to bee receiued they haue made a sacrifice to be heaued and offered That which should bée common to all they haue made priuate where Christians shold celebrate the memorie of Christes death in the Lordes Supper these commaund the Sacrament to bee administred in a tongue not vnderstood where the People vnderstandeth neither what is doone nor said Finally by the confession of Kellison the Papists may be conuinced to be execrable Atheistes Papists proued Atheists by KellisoÌ„s confession For if Atheistes bee monsters begotten by Heresies as he saith then are Papists moÌ„sters For they maintaine many old and new Heresies as hath often beene prooued and are easily conuinced to bee Atheistes The heresies of Simon Magus Carpocrates the Scribes and Pharises the Capernaites of Marcus the Encratites Collyridians Eutychians PelagiaÌ„s StaurolatriaÌ„s diuers others are coÌ„mon among them Page 261. he saith that Christes passion was not our formall justificatioÌ„ or satisfactioÌ„ He meaneth likewise that his iustice is not our formall iustice and saith that he is onely the meritorious cause of our redemption and saluation which deserueth for vs at Gods hands grace by which together with our cooperation we may be saued redeemed But this is most horrible impietie and taketh from Christ the honor of our redemption saluation and iustification making man to be his owne redeemer and sauiour Pag. 667. hee reckoneth them among Atheistes that make God cruell and tyrannical But so doe the Papistes making our Lady more mercifull then Christ and setting out him with Dartes and Thunder-boltes and her with mercy and pittie They do also say that God punisheth sinnes forgiuen with cruell torments in Purgatory and make the Pope to graunt indulgences which God doth not Pag. 668. hee insinuateth them to bee Atheistes that erre in Gods worship and offer not lawfull sacrifices vnto him But of this crime the Papistes are most guilty pretending to offer Chistes body and bloud really which was neuer commaunded them nor can be done more then once and erring wholy in the worship of Saints and images Pag 674. He giueth out boldly that those which coÌ„temne the Churches authoritie bring all Religion into contempt But audaciously hee therein condemneth the Pope and Synagogue of Rome For none euer did more proudly condemne the authoritie of the church then they The Pope claymeth to be aboue the generall councell and aboue the Church If the whole world shold giue sentence against the Pope they say his sentence is to be preferred before all Him they honor as supreme iudge The authoritie of the Fathers they regard not if he say contrary They giue him power to dispense against the Law and against the Apostle Page 689. he saith that such as admit some bookes of Scripture reiect others open a gappe to contempt of all Scripture and religion But if such as reiect Scriptures and contemne them be Atheistes then are Papistes superlatiue Atheistes They also reiect the third and fourth bookes of Ezras and the third and fourth of the Machabees Lastly they esteeme not in allowing or disalowing of canonicall Scriptures eyther
should any deny them to be truly the Apostles successors Finally the defection of ordinary Priestes in the Romish Church being extraordinary we may not imagine that all ordinary rites and formes were to be obserued in the vocation of such as by the instinct of Gods holy spirit were stirred vp extraordinarily to restore the decayed partes and ruines of Gods Temple But sayth Kellison pag. 9. If their Preachers be sent by an ordinary mission let them shewe their succession And heere hee alleageth Tertullians wordes lib. de praescript aduers haeret concerning the orders of Bishops and succession from the Apostles And two places out of S. Augustine in Psal contr part Donati And contr epist fund where he speaketh of the succession of Bishops Againe he vrgeth vs if any thing were extraordinary in those which first reformed the Church to prooue their mission by miracles and runneth into a long discourse of the visibilitie of the Church of miracles and prophesies To which wee answere first that if the succession of Bishops were the onelye proofe of an ordinarie mission the Papists themselues were in bad tearmes hauing no proofes of their succession of popes so much bragged of but the testimony of Anastasius Platina Naucler Sabellicus Onuphrius Genebrard Baronius such like hungrie parasites of the Pope iarring and contending one against another like mastye Curres about a bone Secondly the Greekes Antiochians and Aegiptians pretend to this day succession of Bishops and yet are grossely fallen froÌ„ the faith want true Bishops Thirdly Tertullian S. Augustine speak of successioÌ„ of Bishops but neither of theÌ„ denyeth theÌ„ to bee Bishops or pastors that are not ordeined by a Bishop who was not ordered with al soleÌ„nities Fourthly we shew such a succession of Bishops as the Papists theÌ„selues cannot controle deriuing theÌ„ coÌ„cerning order externall formes from Bishops allowed by our aduersaries and concerning succession of Doctrine from the Apostles Fathers and auncient Bishops of the primitiue Church Fiftly the question concerning the visibilitie of the Church is diuers from that which concerneth succession For I hope K. will not say that hee euer saw the succession of Romish Bishops or that any Apostle saw his successors Lastly wee alleage that the old Prophets were sent extraordinarily and yet wrought no miracles Diuers apostolicall men likewise haue beene raysed vp by God at diuers times and yet wee reade not that eyther all of them prophecied or wrought miracles This being our answere of which Kellison could not be ignorant but that hee is eyther ignorant of matters in question or else voide of honesty and good dealing what is it I pray you that hee is able to alleadge against the vocation and mission of Gods ministers in our Churches First saith he Page 11. They say that the Apostles which were the first Bishops and Pastors had for a time their lawfull successors but that at the length the church fayled and the Pastors with it But while he talketh of mission he lyeth shamefully and without all commission For first wee distinguish both Bishops and ordinarie pastors from Apostles So doth the Apostle also Ephe. 4. Secondly we deny that Christs Church euer hath fayled Thirdly wee teach that the Apostles haue alwaies had some successors albeit neither in one place nor without all interruption If then he haue not fayled in true dealing let him set downe the authors names that haue affirmed this which hee reporteth and relate their words sincerely age 13. he addeth that Luther disobeyed the Pope and the Church and deuised a new Religion to cloake his villany But first the Pope and the Church are euill yoaked together For Christs sheepe heare not the voice of strangers Secondly these words of villany come out of his shop of mallice Lastly neuer shall this K. prooue that Luther deuised any new Religion For he onely impugned late errors and sought to bring Christians backe to the auncient Catholike faith Thirdly he shapeth an other answere for vs Page 14. maketh vs to say that wee had predecessors but they were inuisible But this abuse with he offereth vs is too grosse palpable for neither doe we make our predecessors inuisible Nor doe we denie that the ancient fathers holy Bishops of old time as they taught the Catholicke and apostolike faith and no more were out predecessors Fourthly hee telleth vs that such as pretend extraordinarie sending runne vnsent But he taketh vppon him too too arrogantlye to limit Gods power and seemeth plainely to contradict Gods word S. Paul Ephes 4 mencioneth Euangelists without limitation either of times or places and Saint Iohn Apocaly 11 foresheweth that God will giue power to his two witnesses preaching against the Kingdome of Antichrist and the abuses of their times Neither doth either Optatus or CypriaÌ„ or the Apostle speake any word against vs herein Optatus Lâ—b 2. contra parmen speaketh of some intruding donatists Cyprian of certaine presuÌ„ptuous Nouatians which as the Arch-priests Iesuites and Masse-priests doe in EnglaÌ„d thrust theÌ„selues into the ministerie in Africk without warrant The Apostle Eph. 4. leaueth out the Pope therefore ouerthroweth our aduersaries cause But hee saith not one word why Pastors and teachers may not sometime either hee sent extraordinarily or furnished with extraordinarie power Finally albeit the Church be built vpon a Rocke yet particular Churches Citties may fall into errors and hardly can bee reformed without some extraordinarie helpes Fiftly he affirmeth Page 19. that extraordinarie mission is alwaies to be prooued by extraordinarie signes and tokens of Prophecies or miracles And to this purpose hee feyneth that both Luther and Caluin endeuoured to prophecy and to worke miracles But the first is disprooued by the examples of the prophets and Apostles For neither doe we reade that all the prophets wrought miracles nor that all the Apostles prophesied Furthermore the Godly Martyrs of old time and the auncient Bishops were often indued with extraordinarie graces yet did they not all worke wonders and prophecy The second is disprooued both by our Doctrine and practise For neither doe wee now practise miracles or stand vpon prophecies nor doe wée teach that the Doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles or prophecies To conuince vs this K. produceth the testimonye of Cochleus Surius Staphylus Genebrard Fontanus Bolsec and such like fellowes But their testimonies are not worth a Nut-shell being hired to speake shame of the popes aduersaries Hee is verie light of beleefe that giueth credit to the wordes eyther of enemies or hired parasites Finally he concludeth Page 28. that we haue no assurance of our Religion by the authoritie of our Preachers being able to say no more then false Apostles for proofe of their authoritie Hee doubteth not also to affirme that both Brownists and those of the family of Loue may as well alleadge Scriptures and pretend to bee sent of God as Caluin and Luther But first he sheweth himselfe a simple Doctor of Diuinitie
Mother of errors and the greate Whore described Apocalyps 17. Gregory the first wanteth much of the learning of former Fathers yet is neither he nor his messenger Austen so bad but that his successors were farre worse Furthermore we doe not beleeue that so wise a man as Gregory the first is reputed would write so foolish Bookes as the dialogues that goe vnder his name and are so full of olde wiues tales and fabulous toyes But should Luther Caluin or others ouerlash in speaking of Fathers yet to doe this K. fauour I am content to ioyne with him vpon this issue that the Fathers of the Church in their authentical writinges in the greatest controuersies betwixt vs and the Papistes are for vs and against them And of this hee could not be ignorant but that he is onely a Schoole pedant and an ignorant broacher of new opinions and not versed in the writings of the Fathers Against vs he alleageth the most reuerend learned Father Toby Matthew most worthy Bishop of Durham but he doth offer him singuler wrong as that reuerend Bishop will alwaies testifie Afterward he bringeth in Genebrard a professed enemy whose deposition is no more worth then if this ketler should out of his malice speake it Luthers scruples grew not vpon doubt of the Fathers doctrine but of the long approbation of the Masse and other abuses In fréewill for substance of doctrine we doubt not of the Fathers fauour against the Papistes Finally he sayth The Fathers haue the infallible assistance of Gods holy spirit in exposition of Scriptures and that those which reiect them reiect also the councels of the Church and the authority of Pastors by which the Church is directed And finallye open a gate to all Heresies But heere are manye absurdities hoodled together without truth or order For First he supposeth most falsely that all the Fathers are reiected by vs. Secondly he confirmeth the expositiō of Fathers to be equal to the determination of the Pope which neither his holy Father nor his owne consortes will graunt Thirdly not euerie one that reiecteth Fathers in some things dooth therefore reiect councels or all the pastors of the Church Finally albeit diuers late Councels were reiected and the testimonies of fathers not admitted without choise yet the definitions of Councels which are apparently deduced out of Scriptures and the Fathers authentical expositions consonant to the rule of faith might bee approued by those which haue authoritie in the Church which euerie priuate man is to followe vnlesse by some equall or greater authoritie that resolution be reuersed But if Kellisons Doctrine were confessed then might the Pope goe shake his eares For what shold we need to goe to him if the Fathers haue Gods holy spirit infallibly assisting them in the exposition of Scriptures againe if denying of the authoritie of Fathers were the opening of a gap to all Heresies thē did the Popes open gaps to al Heresies who in their decretaline expositions of hoc est corpus meum feede my Sheep and drinke ye all of this and infinit such like textes of scriptures decline quite from the common interpretation of Fathers and nothing regard their authoritie The fift Chapter is partly a Scholastical exercise concerning the motiues that may enduce men to beleeue the Christian fayth and partly an inuectiue against vs for that we admit not the rinegued Masse-priestes sent vs hither by the Pope their counterfet miracles And thereupon he would conclude that we want those probable meanes to enduce reasonable men to be of our religion which the Papists haue But first his dispute concerning probable motiues to the fayth is nothing else but a vaine discourse of his owne foolish motions disioynted opinions and improbable fancyes For not onely the Pagans of olde time but also the Turkes now may better alleage antiquity consent authority of mission the subduing of the worlde to their religiō miracles and such like motiues then the Papistes séeing Popery is nothing else but a corruption of Christian religion that is neither so auncient as Arianisme nor so largely spread abroad as Paganisme and Turcisme Neither are the Papistes for learning comparable to the auncient Philosophers Secondly whatsoeuer this K. speaketh of mission it maketh against the Masse-priestes that come both without authority and without any message deliuered by Christ or his Apostles vnto them For neuer shal he prooue the Popes vsurped authority though he should liue to the worldes end nor that Masse-priests are to sacifice for quick and dead and to cut the throat of Princes which be the principal poyntes of their mission Thirdly we offer to prooue that we haue not onely those probable motiues which he speaketh of as miracles consent antiquity and such like to enduce men to like of our religion but also the worde of God the testimony of the auncient apostolike Church and many sure groundes which our aduersaryes want Neither néeded this K. to brag much of Bellarmine or Suarez seeing their positions stand refuted without answer but that he which can say little him selfe must néeds relye on others Fourthly nothing hath this babler to obiect either against the authoritye of our teachers or their doctrine which is not more vnsauery then Colewortes twice or thrice sodden Where he calleth Boy Masse-priestes olde teachers and their doctrine also olde and our teachers and doctrine newe he like a poore disputer beggeth that which he cannot by argument effecte or conuince and like a foolish pleader talketh of matters preiudiciall to him selfe Nay when he shall come to tryall he shall find that the Fathers in all poyntes of fayth are for vs and not for the Pope whose triple-Crowneship and decretaline doctrine they neuer knewe Fiftly where he like a curre barketh at the memory of the renowned Father Bishop Iewel and snarleth at the most famous learned man the Lord of Plessis Marlj as if they had corrupted and mis-alledged Scriptures and Fathers and by vntruthes and weake proofes abused they readers the first is iustified by maister Whitakers against al the barkings of his malicious enimies the second hath verified his allegations against al his accusers by the original words of the authors by him alledged in a late edition of his booke both these verifications stand without reply But if we should goe about to collect all the lyes slaunders impostures corruptiōs falsifications errors fooleries fond conclusions absurd assertions without ground and imperfections of Bellarmine Baronius Suarez Harding Saunders Alan Stapleton and their mates they would fill Cart-loades of volumes Finally all this long discourse is as farre from the purpose as Kellison is farre from learning and honesty For heere hee should reason against the grounds of our Religion But groundes are one thing and motiues another those being certaine these probable and oftentimes not concludent But were hee not a beetle-headed Surueyor as he is a polshorne sacrificer of Baal he would haue forborne to touch this poynt of motiues
that no man is to hang his saluation on these newe Ministers Which argueth first that hee supposeth the mission of the Pope and his shaâ—â—â— Masse-priestes to be a principall ground of religion and next 〈◊〉 â—he papists are to hang their saluation vpon them But this 〈…〉 nely a meere foolery and most grosse impietye but also an open way to all superstition and Heresie The same ground is also ouerthrowne by Kellisons owne positions Meere foolery it is to build our faith vpon a blind ignorant and wicked Pope Neither can wee esteeme it other then impietie to adde a foundation to that which is already laide which is Christ Iesus and to beleeue the Popes determinations as the word of God Furthermore this being graunted then will it followe the Pope teaching Heresie that all Papists are to followe him and that when he goeth to hell for teaching errors according to the Chapter si papa dist 40. that Kellison and his consorts are to goe after him Kellison supposeth that he cannot erre But this sheweth that his faith is built vppon supposals yea such supposals as by euident demonstrations are declared to be false Finally this ground of the mission of the Popes and their adherent Masse-priestes is ouerthrowne by Kellison his owne discourse For if the Popes bee not S. Peters or the first Bishops of Romes successors then are they as Kellison saith intruders and false Prophets nay theeues and Robbers But Saint Peters successors they cannot be hauing First no vocation to be Apostles Secondly taking on them an Office that S. Peter neuer had to wit to mannage both the swords to dispose of kingdomes to cut christian mens throates that will not receiue their marke and leauing S. Peters office in feeding Christes shéepe Neither are they the lawful successors of the first Bishops For first they are no Bishops as neither hauing lawfull election by the people and Clergie but onely by certaine new vpstart electors called Cardinals nor preaching or dooing the worke of a Bishop Secondly they haue deuised a new Doctrine and faith diuers from that which the first bishops of Rome taught as their decretales shew Thirdly they haue taken vppon them an vniuersall power both in temporall and ecclesiasticall matters which the Christian Bishops of Rome in times past neuer had nor challenged The Masse-priests consequently being authorized by the Pope cannot pretend any lawfull calling or mission But were they cleare of this exception yet can they not iustifie their mission For first they are called ad sacrificandum pro viuis et defunctis that is to sacrifice for quicke and dead But of such a calling there is neyther ground nor memoriall in the holy scriptures or auncient fathers Secondly they teach not the Doctrine of the Apostles and their successors but of the Popes decretales and of the Schools Sophisters Lastly they are the market slaues of Antichrist hauing their crownes shauen and their handes annointed with his oyle and with him they fight against the Saints of God Of their abhominable villanies I will say nothing at this time although I haue iust occasion being prouoked thereto by the vniust slaunders of this greasie Masse-priest against maister Luther and Maister Iohn Caluin of reuerend memorie That part of my defence shall be reserued to a greater volume Secondly this K. excludeth scriptures from being a foundation of religion Wherin he hath great reason if we respect the doctrine of Papists For how can they admit scriptures for a foundation that rayle against them flye from them and cannot stand if their authoritie were most eminent and to bee preferred before all humaine deuises but this sheweth the Kellison is a better Mason to build Babell and the synagogue of satan which is vpholden with humane traditions and the Popes sword theÌ„ the Church of God which is built vppon the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ being the cheefe corner stone His third foundation as it seemeth is laid vpon Councels and Fathers For of them hee talketh much Lib. 1. C. 4. but neither doth he name what Councels nor what Fathers nor what writings of Fathers he meaneth matters of verie important consideration For foundations must be certaine But among the councels actes and writings of Fathers there are many thinges neuer established by councels nor taught by Fathers Furthermore the Fathers themselues will not haue their writings taken for canonicall or authenticall scriptures as may bee prooued by infinite testimonies But I will heere onelye alleadge one or two Quamuis sanctus sit aliquis post apostolos saith Hierome in Psal 86. quamuis disertus sit non habet authoritatem He saith plainely that no Father after the Apostles time hath authoritie The same Father sheweth that onely Scriptures are the foundation of the Church and Augustine lib. 2. Contr. Crescon c. 31. hath these words literas Cypriani non vt canonicat habeo The like he saith epist 19. ad Hieronymum and epist 48. shewing that there is great difference betwixt scriptures and the writings of Fathers Finally diuers Heretikes haue pretended councels and Fathers His last and moste authenticall foundation is the supreme iudgement of the Pope But that sheweth that popish religion is rather from man then God and that the Papists are rather the synagogue of Antichrist relying vppon his decretales then the church of God that is built vpon also plainelye declare that there is no certainty in popish Religion standing vppon the humor of a man whose opinions are repugnant to other popes and whose minde may change and cause him to vtter contrarie Doctrines Thirdly it sheweth that Popish Religion is absurd being grounded vpon the opinions and sentences of ignorant impious men Finally grant this then the Papists if the Pope deny Christ must all goe to hell with him Likewise Stapleton handling of purpose this argument in the preface of his booke of Doctrinall principles deliuereth vnto vs these seauen principles and foundations of faith First the Catholike and Apostolike Church Secondly the power of the same church in teaching and iudging matters of faith infallibly Thirdlye the persons in whome this power doth reside Fourthly the meanes by which they proceede in teaching judging Fiftly the chiefe heads about which that power is conuersant Sixtly authoritie to interpret Scriptures infallibly and lastly power to deliuer Doctrines not conteined in Scriptures But if he had beene bound in statute staple I doe not thinke he could haue spoken more absurdly or impiously falslye For First if hee talke of principles demonstratiue of the christian faith then should he not haue talked of single words and termes as he doth but of propositions or Scriptures conteining the primarye propositions of the Christian faith Secondly if the rude fellow had but had one graine of pietie he would not haue left out the holy Scriptures out of the number of christian principles Thirdly the Church to speake properlye is built vpon a foundation and is not the foundation of the Church
think that these men entend the edification of Gods Church who â—rre in the maine principles and foundations of fayth and cannot stand vnlesse the Pope who hath manifestly declared himselfe an enemy of religion may sit iudge in his owne cause Chap. 3. Kellisons Motiues to Popish religion compared with the Motiues that may enduce men to embrace true Christian religion Therein also the true motiues to Popery are touched KEllison in his first Booke and fift Chapter talketh of Motiues to Christian religion but so coldely and barely as if his cause wanted life and motion First he telleth vs pag. 106. that our Sauiour Christ proued his Mission by prophecyes and miracles Among other miracles hee talketh of the strange coÌ„quest which the Apostles made of Idolatry Secondly he sayth we want reason and authoritye to perswade men to our religion being not comparable eyther to auncient Fathers or to Bellarmine Suarez and such fellowes in wit or learning or good life or antiquity or number or dignity Thirdly he talketh of consent succession But First the example of our Sauiour Christ the conquest made by Christs Apostles ouer Idolatrye maketh against the idolatrous papists For neither can the Pope prooue his vniuersall Monarchy by Prophets or by miracles nor hath any Christian man reason to adhere to papistes that want confirmation of their Popes and Masse-priestes Mission and yet bring into their Churches heathenish idolatry and much false and erronious doctrine and namely concerning the 7. Sacramentes the sacrifice of Christs body and blood in the Masse for quicke dead Popish purgatory and teaching that man by power of free will is able to worke his owne saluation that we are to make vowes and confessions to Saints to offer sacrifice in honor of them that we are to satisfie for sinnes whose guilt is remitted in Purgatory that the Pope hath power to deliuer soules out of Purgatory by his Indulgences that his Chaire is the foundatioÌ„ of the church and such like doctrines of deuils Secondly the ancient Fathers are wholy against the papistes in these poynts As for the Popes of Rome and their parasites Bellarmine Suarez and the rest they are not such as are to be bragged vpon eyther for learning wit good life or any vertue Thirdly neither are the papistes comparable in number to the Turkes Paâ—aÌ„s nor haue they eyther true succession or consent or antiquity that maketh for them Nay if the papistes would stand to these motiues they were cleerly gone For neither haue they prophesies or miracles for them Nor can the Pope or the Masse-priests prooue their mission by miracles nor doth antiquity make for them As for good life this K. may be much ashamed to speake of it the filthynes of Popes Cardinals Masse-priestes Monkes Nonnes and Friars being so notorious to the worlde and recorded in so many storyes and actes of Councels What then is the reason that so many adhere to papistes and what are the motiues that enduce so many to like their religion Forsooth first Fire and Sword For they kill all that will not receiue the Popes marke or that once mutter against their idolatrous religion Secondly secret and trecherous practises against all that shall once dare to professe the truth Masse-priestes brewe treason and rebellion Iesuites set on assassinors The Pope hath his Agents with all Princes Neither doth he or his Agents omit any occasion to stirre vp Princes to make warre against them that professe the truth and to persecute them to death Thirdly excoÌ„municating and killing and poysoning of Kings opposite to the Popes tyranny By the Popes practice K. Henry the 8. and Quéene Elizabeth were often in danger here in England By the trechery of the Leaguers King Henry the 3. was slayne and Henry the 4. wounded and brought to great extremity in France Henry of Lucemburgh was poysoned by a Dominican Fryar Frederic the 2. was empoysoned and in the end murdered as Matthew Paris doth signifie and this no dout by the Popes practise The 5. of Nouember anno 1605. a trayne of gunpowder was layd by certaine Papistes vnder the vpper house of Parliament purposing to destroy the King the Quéene the Prince the nobles and commons there assembled and by their destruction to replant popery in England The treason discouered they broke forth into open rebellion Fourthly slaundrous Libels as the inuectiues of Alan and Parsons against Quéene Elizabeth and the State of Saunders against Her and her Parents and Counsaile of the Leaguers and Iesuites against King Henry the 3. and 4. of France and the rayling discourses written against Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza Knox and all godly men declare Fiftly their impudent lies and fables in setting foorth their owne Religion and discommending the truth and such as eyther now or in time past professed it as the fabulous tales of Iacobus de voragine Surius Baronius and diuers writers of popish Histories will testifie Sixtly their publishing of counterfet bookes vnder the names of Fathers and the corrupting of Fathers by their expurgatorie indexes 7. Their impudent falsification of ancient Fathers and other writers as may bee prooued out of the allegations of Bellarmine Stapleton and other popish Proctors 8. Their false imputations laide vpon others and their impudent denials of thinges done by themselues 9. The diligent suppressing of the Books of holy Scripture and all Bookes written in vulgar tongues concerning matters of religion 10. The prohibiting of Christians to dispute reason or question of matters of faith 11. The ignorance blindnes of christians that know nothing but onely such matters as the false Fryars and Masse-priestes tel them 12 The impudent clamors raylings of this generation in Pulpits lying and slaundring all that professe the Gospell sincerely 13. The rigor of auriculer confession by meanes whereof the Popish faction vnderstandeth all mens secrets 14. The bloody crueltie of the popes agentes executioners and inquisitors Finally the rewardes and prayses that are giuen to those that trauaile eyther by writing or practise to maintaine the Popes cause Without these motiues all the motiues mentioned by Kellison were to no purpose As for vs wee haue two principall motiues to hold vs in the truth which would also mooue others to draw vnto vs if they knew them The first is the truth and iustice of our cause The next is the impieties blasphemies abhominations fooleries absurdities iniustice of Popery For the truth of our Religion weâ— offer to bring Scriptures councels Fathers antiquitie consent true succession law reason and all other proofes required in the iustification of Religion The reasons to deterre men from Popery we shal God willing deduce at large in a particular discourse Thus much may serue to requite Kellisons discourse of motiues to Religion for the present Chap. 4. Of the markes and properties of Heretickes THe name and nature of Heresie beeing so odious it is not to be maruelled if the Patrons thereof disguise themselues in their tearmes names