for it Ambrose Catharine tractat de imaginibus saith God prohibited images simply but that this prohibition was positiue others deny both images to be forbidden and the second commandement to be positiue Occham Maior and Richardus are of opinion that a sacrament cannot be defined Scotus in 4. dist 1. q. 2. holdeth that it may be defined imperfectly Ledesma in tract de sacrament in genere q. 1. art 2. saith it may properlie bee defined Finally to shew the contradictions of Papists we need to seeke no further than to Bellarmine who in euery controuersie bringeth in different opinions of men of his side Gardiner a pillar of popery did oftentimes contradict himselfe and his fellowes sometimes hee swore against the Popes supremacy sometime like a forsworne creature hee stood for it somtime he consented to the dissolution of monasteries as sinkes of Sodomy and all tibaldrie and villany sometime be spoke for them his booke entituled Marcus Constantius is full of contradictions M. Foxe hath scored vp great multitudes The contradictions of Robert Parsons in his book of three Conuersions I haue noted in my answeare to that treatise The whole masse also of Poperie doth consist of contrary pieces as I haue shewed in the contradictions of the doctrine of the Masse of purgatory of indulgences of the Pope and diuers other principall points and haue proued the same in treatises of that argument For example they say the Masse is an vnbloudy sacrifice and yet teach that euerie Priest doth really offer and drinke Christs bloud Sometime they say the sacrifice is but one sacrifice yet in the canon they say sacrifices in the plurall number Sometime they say the Priest only offereth this sacrifice but in the canoÌ„ they make the people to offer sacrifices In the canon they pray that Angels may carry Christs body vnto Gods high altar but all confesse that Christs body is in heauen before There also they make the Priest a mediatour for Christ. but where they speake soberly they make Christ a mediator both for the Priest and others In heauen they say Christ is visible and palpable on the altar they make him inuisible and impalpable They say the Masse is an externall sacrifice yet no man euer yet could see Christs body externally sacrificed In purgatorie they say soules suffer extreme paines but in the Masse they saie they slâ—epe in peace They teach that Christians may performe the law of God perfectly but they will not grant that they may liue without sinne which is all one Talking of auricular confession they make it necessarie but in the chap. Petrus doluit and lachrymae dist 1. de poenit they denie it The Pope calleth himselfe seruant of seruants yet doth he take vpon him as lord of lords Order they say is one sacrament yet they teach also that there are seuen Orders and euerie one of them a sacrament which is as much as if they should make one seuen and seuen one The Pope they saie is head of the Church but that is as much as if they should teach that their Church in the vacatio nis headlesse If then the catholicke faith be one and those that professe the faith agree in one then cannot popery be the true Catholicke faith that containeth so many contradictions CHAP. XXVII That popery is a most foolish and absurd religion AS the lawes of God are full of wisedome and giue vs a true vnderstanding so when man of his owne braine vndertaketh to adde vnto his commandements the same in proofe falleth out to be nothing but vanity and foolery the same wee sind verified in the additions of the superfluous religion of Papists for although it haue a shew of wisedome as the voluntarie worship of Angels had of which the Apostle Coloss 2. speaketh yet compared with the wisedome of God reuealed in the Gospell it is meere foolery For first what is more foolish then to forsake the liuing springs of holy scripture out of which do sally waters of life and to follow after the puddle streams of Romish traditions of scriptures we are assured that they are the word of God but no man can affirme that of Romish traditions or the Popes decretales that either professeth piety or loueth truth is it not then strange that any Christians should bee so foolish as to match the word of man with Gods word and where we haue a certaine rule to seeke for a broken vncertaine and crooked rule Againe it is most absurd not to beleeue the scriptures without the Popes warrant but to say that Christians are not to beleeue in God nor in Christ Iesus nor to receiue the rest of the articles of our Creed vnlesse the church of Rome doe deliuer them vnto vs is not only a peece of great foolery but also a very high streine of madnesse and yet this is the doctrine of Popery for Stapleton saith that the church must needes consigne the scriptures vnto vs and the authoritie of the church both he and others giue to the Pope likewise in their catechisme the Papists signifie that faith is of things onely proposed to vs by the church so that if the church propose not the articles of faith we are not to beleeue them if these men teach truth further this sheweth the Romish church to consist of a packe of infidels for if the same beleeued not without the authority of the church then did she beleeue nothing of Christ seeing the Papists acknowledge no other Church but that of Rome and no church can teach it selfe Finally this is as much as if they should say that the law of the Prince is not to be receiued vnlesse it be proposed by the crier or other such like officer The Masse-priests of Trent sess 4. most absurdly prefer the old Latin vulgar translation of the Bible before the originall text which is as much as if they should preferre S. Hierome and other interpreters before the Prophets and Apostles and the streames before the fountaines Generally they forbid scriptures to bee read publickely in vulgar tongues but they permit most fabulous legends to bee read publickely The holy scriptures they will not permit to bee read in vulgar tongues of the multitude without licence but they are content that any of their followers should reade the Popes decretales or the miracles of their god of paste or the history of our Lady of Loreto and other such lying legends without licence To say that the Pope is the head of the vniuersall church is meere foolery for grant that and it will follow that the Church is sometime without head as in the time of vacation of the papacy and sometime a monster with two or three heads as when two or three Popes reigne at once and sometime a mad Church as hauing a mad and franticke head The church they say albeit catholicke yet is alwaies visible but this being granted it followeth that vniuersall things may be the obiect of sense and that the church of
massacres and cruell executions done by the Papistes of late yeeres vpon the Saints of God haue proceeded from no other fountaine then from the malice of the diuel for he was a murderer from the beginning and Apocalyps 12. we read that the great red dragon that is the diuel persecuted the woman which was a figure of the church of God and caused her to flie into the wildernesse from the same fountaine also doe issue all the forgeries lies and calumniations of Papists whereby they haue gone about to suppresse the truth for the diuell is the father of lies and from their father the diuel the lying friers and Masse-priests haue learned their lying deuises who then is of God must needs hate this religion that is partly inuented and partly mainteined by the diuell CHAP. XXXIII That Papists can haue no assurance of the truth of their religion OF the trueth of our Christian faith we are assured for the articles thereof were deliuered by Christ taught by the Apostles and Prophets conteined in Scriptures and confessed by the catholicke church of all times but it is not so with Popery for neither did Christ deliuer it nor the Apostles and Prophets teach it nor is the same conteined in Scriptures or confessed by the catholike church of all times but dependeth partly vpon traditions not written and partly vpon the Popes determinations and partly vpon the opinions of schoole-men and canonistes and the monkes and friers now what assurance I pray you can any Papist haue of these doctrines First no man yet could euer tell what these traditions are which the Priests of Trent would make equall to Scriptures Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. dei talketh at randon but he dare not come to particulars nor directly expresse them Secondly they dare not define where these traditions are to be found if they say in the decretales then all future traditions are cut off and former traditions founded on the Popes opinions if they say in the legends their traditions will prooue lies and fooleries for such are the legends if they tell vs of the pure fountaines of traditions of Caesar Baronius as Pope Sixtus the fift doth they will be laughed at that were not auised of their groundes before the time of this babling and confused Cardinal Thirdly they cannot shew why some traditions should be obserued and others not but if traditions were to be receined with equall affection to holy Scriptures then might none be abolished As for the determinations of Popes they can alledge no reason why they should be true if they bring the wordes of Christ to Peter they concerne them nothing that are so vnlike to Peter if they bring Christs promises to his church they concerne them much lesse for they are rather enemies then members of the church but were they members yet what man is priuiledged so that he cannot erre but those which for writing of holy Scriptures were led into all truth by the holy Ghost which is the spirit of truth Finally there is such contention betwixt the schoolemen and canonists and such diuersity of opinions among the seuerall Doctors of both the sides that it is bard to say whether any of them teacheth truly and most certaine that many of them teach falsely nay scarce any point of doctrine is deliuered by schoolemen wherein they dissent not one from another Now if they say their faith is founded not only vpon the Popes determinations and Apostolike traditions but also vpon holy scriptures yet holding as they doe this shall not any whit releeue them For first they cannot assure themselues that the Latine vulgar translation of the Bible is more true then the originall text in Hebrew and Greeke for all the fathers with one consent preferre the original fountaines before all versions Secondly they must needes stand in doubt which is the old Latine vulgar translation for if they allow that which was set out by Clement the 8. then cannot they allow of that which was set out by Sixtus Quintus the one so much differing from the other nor if they approue this can they follow that Thirdly they doe not beleeue the scriptures because God speaketh in them nor the traditions because they are Gods worde as they hold but because the church doth tell vs which are canonicall scriptures and consigneth them vnto vs and doth further deliuer vnto vs these traditions not written for this is Stapletons opinion in his bookes de doctrinalibus princip and authorit ecclesiast defens and is confessed of most Papists but if the authoritie of scriptures and traditions in respect of vs doth so depend vpon the church that no man can be assured of either without the authority of the Church then doth the faith of Papists rest vpon the Pope who as they say is chiefe gouernor of the church the which will bring the Papists to great vncertainty for who is so mad as to beleeue that a blind Pope can well iudge of colours or so senselesse as not to beleeue Gods word without the Popes warrant Fourthly they receiue not the articles of the faith because they are contained in scriptures but because they are deliuered vnto vs by the Pope Thomas Aquinas 2.2.9.1 art 10. saith that the ordring of matters of faith and the publication of the articles of the Creed belongeth to the pope that Athanasius his Creed was receiued because it was allowed by the Pope and this by others is deliuered in more grosse termes Stapleton in his doctrinall principles saith that the last resolution of matters of faith is in the Popes desinitiue sentence and Bellarmine lib. 3. de verb. dei c. 4. goeth about to shew that the Pope is the supreme iudge to whom the interpretation of scriptures and last resolution of all controuersies of religion is to bee referred But the papists can neither assure thomselues that he that sitteth at Rome is true Pope and S. Peters true successor nor that his determinations are certeine or true That the Pope is S. Peters true successor it will be hard to proue considering that he preacheth not as S. Peter did nor S. Peter weare a triple crowne and command temporall Princes as he doth it is very hard also to know whether he bee true Pope or no after the common vnderstanding of Papists for vnlesse he bee baptized and truly ordred and chosen he is no true Pope but it is hard to know whether he were baptized which dependeth vpon the Priests intention which is vncerteine and hidden it is also more hard to vnderstand whether he were truly ordred or not for if he were not baptized then is he not capable of Priest-hood as Innocentius saith c. ventens de presbytero non baptizato and if he that ordred him had no intention to doe it then receiued he no orders lastly it is a matter most difficult to know whether the Pope was rightly chosen or else by Simony or violence or other meanes intruded so it is alwaies most
deposing Princes nay to assirme that this great authority is prositable for Princes Ghineard a Iebusite was hanged in Paris anno 1594. for writing and mainteining diuers seditious positions concerning the Popes authority in disposing the crowne of France and translating the same from the family of Bourbon Parsons in his warne-word p. 2. f. 127. alloweth the deposing of Henry the 3. of France neither would he haue desired that the Bull of Pius the sift against Queene Elizabeth might be suspended against the Papists but that he imagined that she was iustly deposed the same man in his seditious booke of titles lib. 1. c. 1. endeuoreth to proue that the succession in kingdomes by necrenesse of blood is by positiue lawes of the common-welth and may vpon iust causes be altered by the same in his third chapter he pretendeth that not only vnworthy claimers may be put backe but also that kings in possession may be chastised and deposed his drist in the fourth chapter is to shew that the people sometimes may lawfully proceed against princes is it not then strange that the factious schollers of this seditious teacher are still harbored in the bowels of this state William Rainolde a rinegat English-man in a certeine treatise set out vnder the name of William Rosse and titled de iusta reip Christianae supra reges impios haereticos authoritate c. doth in expresse termes defend the wicked league of the French rebels against the King and giue the people power to depose their kings the same man in the 2. chapter of that booke assirmeth impudently that the right of all the Kings and kingdomes of Europe is laid vpon this foundation that common-welthes or the people may depose their kings I us omnium Europae regum regnorum saith he hoc fundamento nititur quod resp possint suos reges deponere In all Europe therefore it will be hard to find more arrant traitors then himselfe and his complices Bellarmine lib. 5. de pontif Rom. c. 6. saith it is not lawfull for Christians to tolerat a king that is an insidell or an heretike if he goe about to draw his subiects to his heresie or infidelity non licet Christianis tolerare regem infidelem aut haereticum si ille pertrahere conetur subdit os ad suam haeresim aut infidelitatem a hard sentence against his Maiesty if Papists had power to iudge him Emanuel Sain his booke called aphorismi confessariorum holdeth these aphorismes in verbo princeps viz. that a prince may be deposed by the common-welth for tyranny and also if he doe not his duty or where there is iust cause and that another may be chosen by the greatest part of the people in the word tyrannus he affirmeth that a tyrant may be deposed by the people although they be sworne to bee obedient vnto him if being admonished he will not amend now to the Popish faction all are tyrants that will not admit their Popish superstition though otherwise they bee neuer so mild and gentle and so it appeareth they accompt of our gratious king whom of late they haue sought trecherously to murder If then we admitte this common doctrine of Papists of the Popes authoritie in deposing Kings and giuing them Law we diminish the authority of Kings and make them subiects to the Pope which is a matter abominable to be either taught or beleeued we doe also indanger not only the state of all Kings but also of their kingdomes for how can any King stand against the violence of the Pope if he haue authority to depose Kings by this vsurped authority Gregory the 7. wrought Henry the Emperor and his subiects many troubles Paschall the 2. made the sonne to rise against the father and the subiects against their Princes and in the end caused the en peror to be taken prisoner and to resigne his Empire the same man also as he subdued the father so quarreled he with the sonne and caused his subiects to take armes against him Innocent the 2. by force of armes thought to vanquish Roger King of Sicilia and in a pitched field had preuailed against him if the sonne had not succoured his father Roger. Adrian the 4. and Alexander the 3. did so farre preuaile against Fridericke the first that he held the stirrop to the first and was troden vpon by the second Celestin the 3. proudly demeaned himselfe against Henry the 6. casting the crowne from his head with his foote as he kneeled before him as we reade in Rogor Houeden Innocent the 3. brought the Emperors Philip and Otho to destructiō by his furious persequution the same man caused King Iohn of England to surrender his crowne and was the cause of the losse of Normandy to the English Neither did he alone offer wrong to Iohn King of England for before his time king Henry the second had receiued a great scorne of the Pope in the cause of Thomas Becket Gregory the 9. and Innocent the 4. with great fury set vpon Friderike the 2. and emploied Christians that had made vowes to fight against the Saracens to the ruine of the Emperor Iohn the 22. Benet the 12. and Clement the 6. with implacable hatred prosequuted Lewes of Bauier and that for no other cause then for that he tooke on him as Emperor without the Popes allowance and for the same cause Harold encurred the Popes displeasure not submitting himselfe to receiue his crowne of the Popes faction Boniface the eight while he sought to subdue Philip of France and the houle of Colonna in Italy troubled both Spaine and Italy the Popes of late time haue caused all the stirres in Germany Italy France Flanders England and Scotland the leaguers of France were confirmed in their rebellion by the Pope and droue King Henry the third out of his pallace and killed him by a Dominican Frier as he beseeged Paris and long withstood the king now reigning Vpon the excommunication of Paul the third the papists of England rebelled against King Henry the eight in his bul of excommunication recorded by Sanders he commanded his subiects to resist him and to throw him out of his kingdome principibus viris ac ducibus Angliae saith he caeteraeque nobilitati praecipit vt vi armis se Henrico opponant illumque è regni sinibus eijcere nitantur by the Popes excommunications the rebellion was raised in the North of England by the Erles of Westmerland and Norththumberland and diuers tumults in Ireland against Queene Elizabeth nay albeit our King be not denounced excommunicat yet did the gun-pouder Papists seeke to blow him vp with the principall men of England neither had the Spaniards anno 1588. any better ground to inuade England then the Popes commandement and warrant Seeing then the Pope taketh vpon him a superiority ouer all Kings seeketh to depose all such as will not conforme themselues to his will it is much to be wondred that Christian princes that doe embrace his doctrine
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
for Christ vsed them not neither are they Hebrew but Latine seuenthly in Hierusalem it was neuer beleeued that Christ either did eat vp himselfe or offer himselfe to his father at his last supper or that he offered himselfe twise or that there was any priest after the order of Melchisedech but Christ for the Apostle to the Hebrewes teacheth contrarie finally we neuer read that the Christians in Hierusalem beleeued that some Masses were wet some dry some in the honor of Angels some in the honour of Saints some in the honor of confessors some good for pigges others for horses some for quicke some for dead or that all those trickes and skips are commendable which the Masse-priests vse at the altar or that Christ ordeined either the consecration of Churches with the alphabet in Greeke or that Priests were to vse those ceremonies which now are frequented in the church of Rome in the celebration of the Masse That the Pope came not from Hierusalem it appeareth first for that among al the ministers of the church described Eph. 4. and 1. Cor. 12. there is no Pope nor monarch of the church expressed we read of Apostles Prophets Euangelists Pastors and others but the Pope is quite forgotten which is most vnlikely especially considering that he is by the Papists supposed to be the head and foundation of the church secondly the name is rather Latine then Hebrew or Syriake for some deriue it from papè because the Pope is the wonderment of the world some from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some from the 2. syllables of pater patrum Thirdly at Hierissalem neuer was there any termed by the name of Christs vicars general or that wore a triple crowne and had a gard of Switzars attending vpon him fourthly Saint Peter neuer tooke vpon him to depose kings or to translate kingdomes from one to another which the Pope now vsurpeth fifthly the Popes decretales and decrees which conteine the Popes office and authority and the marrow of his religion haue proceeded from Rome and not from Hierusalem sixthly we read that the law of God and not the Popes lawes came from Hierusalem finally the faith and doctrine of the Pope for the most part hath beene inuented and published since Hierusalem came to bee subiect to the Saracens and Turkes if then it came from the Turkie Hierusalem it must needes be rather Turkish then Christian the decretales are rather like the Alcoran then the new testament the force that the Pope vseth against Christians proceedeth rather from Mahomet then from S. Peter The pilgrimages to Rome are like the pilgrimages to Mecha lastly both Turkes and Papists worship Saints and pray for the dead alike To proceede a little further the Romish fine Sacraments added to the Sacrament of baptisme and the Lords supper had neuer allowance by the Apostles remaining at Hierusalem for albeit mariage Priesthood and repentance were alwaies practised by the people of God vnder the law yet were they not vsed as Sacraments neither in these matters did either the people of God vnder the law or the first Christians vse the Popish orders and formes or Sacraments now at Rome frequented in time past neither were Priests prohibited to marry nor were there any times limited for mariage nor was it deemed vnlawfull for gossips to marry In Hierusalem neuer was any such forme of ordering of Priests knowen as is vsed in popery where they say receiue power to offer sacrifice for quicke and dead Nor did the Christians of Hierusalem beleeue that there were seven orders and euery one a Sacrament and yet but one Sacrament in all or that Priests were to haue shauen crownes To thinke that the first Christians at Hierusalem confessed their sinnes euery yeere at the least in the Priests care is most absurd likewise to say that the forme of absolution that is now vsed was then knowen thirdly Christians then did neither lash themselues nor thinke to satisfie for sinnes by eating saltfish or going barefoote lastly they neither beleeued that Christians were to satisfie for their sinnes in purgatory nor that the Pope caried the keies of purgatory and could deliuer soules from thence by indulgences This forme of Confirmation signo te signo crucis confirmo te Chrismate salutis c. was by authority first established in the conuenticle of Florence vnder Eugenius the 4. a Venetian and not by any that came from Hierusalem he also ordered that oile and balme should be the matter of this Sacrament Bonauenture and Alexander Hales affirme that Confirmation was instituted at Melda popish confirmation is far degenerated from that Confirmation that was vsed in the primitiue church and which we retaine in England The forme also matter of extreme vnction was there appointed by Eugenius the doctrine of the character and effectes of extreme vnction are not to be found but in the frapling schoolemen Now he that should seeke for the originall of holy water and holy salt and holy candles at Hierusalem he should but seeke to draw water out of a flint and as well might he light a candle in the sea water in the Roman missal we find these words I exorcise or coniure thee thou creature of water and exorcizo te creatura salis and such like but Stapleton should shew these things out of some Hebrew or Syriake missal The eating of Paschal lambes I confesse was vsed at Hierusalem but not by Christians but by Iewes obseruing the ceremonies of Moyses his law The Romish missals breuiaries our ladies Psalters the rosaries and such like bookes and ceremonies came out of the closet of the Popes breast and not from Hierusalem as I thinke our aduersaries will confesse if they bee put to the question In Rome vpon good Friday they make agnus Dei of holy wax and holy chrisme and these they say do defend Christians from lightning and tempest hiagnia fulgure tempestate fideles credentes defendunt saith Durand rational diumor lib. 6. c. 79. but this ceremony came neuer from Hierusalem neither did the Christians there beleeue anie such doctrine When a church is consecrated the bishop sprinkleth the wals with holy water knocketh at the dore and saith attollite principes portas vestras then he maketh crosses on the pauement and describeth all the Greeke and Latin alphabet as Durand sheweth lib. 1. rat diuin c. 6. but if popery had come from Hierusalem it is more likely hee should describe the Hebrew alphabet such abuses of scripture and foolish ceremonies certes neuer came from the Christians of Hicrusalem but from the followers of Antichrist at Rome The conuenticle of Trent maketh the old Latin vulgar translation authenticall but if the same had hoped to proue the Romish religion by the practise of the Church of Hierusalem the same would neuer haue neglected the Hebrew text The Church of Hierusalem diligently obserued Gods commandement concerning the making and worshipping of granen images and the whole worship of God we may not
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
Bishops of Rome or else he must know that whatsoeuer he fableth of his three supposed conuersions the same will make for the destruction of Popery and the ouerthrow of the cause which he mainteineth Secondly we are able to prooue that all these corruptions of doctrine superstitious deuises impieties blasphemies which we refuse haue beene receiued and established in the synagogue of Rome not onely since the Apostles times but also since the time of Eleutherius and Gregory the first the idolatrous worship of images was first confirmed by the second coūncell of Nice vnder the Empire of Irene and by little and little brought into the Westerne church being long oppugned by the bishops of France Germany and Britain That the images of the crosse and Trinity should be worshipped with latria was not allowed in that idolatrous councell but first taught by Thomas Aquinas and his followers and grounded not vpon Gods word but vpon this rule of Philosophy that the same motion is directed to the image and the thing imagined which rule by him is mistaken being meant of the species or representation of things in our vnderstanding and not of materiall images that come not within our vnderstanding The Popes authority began to be established first by the rebellion of Gregory the second and Gregory the third that caused Italy to reuolt from the Emperour vnder pretence of worship of images and afterward the same was confirmed by Gregory the seuenth and his successors that by force and violence ouerthrew the empire and made way by the diuisious of Christendome to the victories and conquests of the Turkes and Saracens Boniface the third obteined of Phocas that the church of Rome should be reputed head of other churches Boniface the 9. as Theodoric à Niem in his booke of schisme testifieth by fraude vsurped first the temporall gouernment ouer the Citie and territorie of Rome which before that belonged either to the emperor or to the citizens and thus by fraud and violence the Pope made himselfe great and by little and little exalted himselfe in the church and erected the kingdome of Antichrist The carnall eating and presence of Christs body in the sacrament was first decreed by Nicolas the second in the Chap. ego Berengarius dist 2. de consecrat for there we read first that Christs true body is handled with the hands of Priests broken and torne with the teeth of the faithfull his words prescribed to Berengarius are verum corpus sanguinem domini nostri Iesu Christi esse sensualiter non solum sacramentum sed in veritate manibus sacerdotum tractari frangi fidelium dentibus atteri Transubstantiation got reputation first by the decree of Innocent the 3. as we read in the chapter Firmiter de sum Trin. fid cath for there he decreeth that the bread is transubstantiate into the body and the wine into blood by the power of God but yet two inconueniences will heere fall out if we yeeld to his words for there he saith that Christ is both the priest and the sacrifice and that this transubstantiation is wrought by the power of God whereof the first ouerthroweth the priesthood of the polshorne priests of Baal the second doth take away the efficacie from these wordes hoc est enim corpus meum and hic est sanguis meus and ascribeth all to the power of God absolutely In the conuenticle of Constance we finde it first resolued that the accidents of bread and wine doe remaine without subiect and that the Pope is Christs immediate vicar and sess 13. that although Christ did institute the eucharist in bread and wine yet lay-men were onely to receine it vnder one kinde Auricular confession was established by Innocent the 3. in the chap. omnis vtriusque sexus de poenit remiss for before that it was free to confesse or not to confesse the doctrine of confession was enlarged by the canonistes and schoole-men In the conuenticle of Florence we reade that the forme of ordring masse-priestes of popish confirmation and extreme vnction and of other popish sacraments was then first setled by law there also Purgatorie and the Popes supremacy was first enacted by force of law Clement the 6. in the chapter vnigenitus extr de poenit remis did first deuise the treasure of indulgences Boniface the 8. and Sixtus the 4. ordred the Popish Iubiley That the Pope is aboue the Councel it was first decreed in the councel of Lateran vnder Leo the 10. who also begā first to thunder out his excommunications against M. Luther Finally the conuenticle of Trent gaue finall complement to the Popish doctrine of Traditions of the Latine vulgar translation of concupiscence of formal iustification by charitie and works of seuen sacraments of the sacrifice of the masse of purgatorie and indulgences of framing the images of God the Father and the holy Ghost and the rest of their heresies and abuses for what before the schoolemen had taught vainlie that began now by the decrees of the Pope and his complices to be established and held for law then also the missals breuiaries offices and other rituall bookes began to be confirmed by the Popes authoritie Thirdly it is an easie matter to prooue that the doctrine of S. Peter and of the times wherein Ioseph of Arimathaea Eleutherius and Gregory the first liued is direct contrarie in diuers points to popish religion S. Peter 1. ep 2. exhorted all Christians to submit themselues to kings and gouernors but the Pope commandeth subiects to rebell and take armes against princes and excommunicateth such as refuse so to doe as appeareth by the excommunication of Paul the 3. against king Henry the 8. and of Pius the fift against Queene Elizabeth both which are extant in Sanders his libell de schismate S. Peter 1. ep 1. would haue Christians to trust perfectly on gods grace the Papists teach their disciples to distrust gods grace and to doubt of their saluation and to trust rather in their owne works and merits he saith we are not redeemed with corruptible things but with Christes most precious blood these teach that men are redeemed after a sort by indulgences and by the satisfaction and merites of Saints to whom Bellarmine in his booke of indulgences doubteth not to giue the title of redeemers S. Peter exhorteth Christians to desire the sincere milke of Gods word that they may grow thereby the papistes barre men from hearing Gods word in tongues which they vnderstand and send them to beleeue the traditions of the church of Rome and the impure trash of the schoolemen and the Popes decretales he excludeth the lordship of Popes ouer Gods inheritance these false teachers enforce it he exhorteth vs to make our election sure these fellowes teach that Christians cannot be assured of their election or make it sure Ioseph of Arimathaea and the godly bishops that liued in his time and diuers hundred yeeres after him continued we doubt not in
Platina saith obteined of Phocas the Emperour that the church of Rome should be called and holden the head of other churches The councell of Rome that authorised the Popish real presence of Christs body and blood in the Sacrament was celebrated vnder Pope Nicolas the 2. some 1050. yeares after Christ the 2. Nicene Councell that established the worship of images in some sort was assembled long before vnder the reigne of Irene but the actes of the councell could not bee receiued in the Westerne church till long after the councel of Lateran that decreed transubstantiation was assembled in the times of Innocentius the 3. the councell of Constance that first brought in the communion vnder one kind and the subsistence of accidents without subiect was summoned about the yeare of our Lord 1414 the synode of Florence that first established the 7. sacraments and beganne to talke of their formes and confirmed the Popes supremacy and Purgatory published her decrees about the yeare of our Lord 1439. the actes of the conuenticle of Trent that made vp a complete body of Popery were confirmed by Pius the 4. in the yeare of our Lord 1564. and this is the antiquity of those conuenticles that doe principallie confirme the doctrine of Popery The scholemen crept into the church about the yeare of our Lord 1200. the father of them al was Peter Lombard that flourished some 1140. yeares after Christ The canonists began after the times of Gregory the ninth that liued and flourished about the yeare of our Lord God 1230. The chiefe founders of Popery were the Popes by their authority the Cardinals by their counseill the Monkes and Friers by their bookes and preaching the Masse-priests by their massing and practising the dinel himselfe by his craft malice and violence the Popes authority in ecclesiasticall canses was not great before the times of Boniface the third nor in temporall matters before Gregory the seuenth Boniface the ninth as Theodoric à Niem testifieth by craft entered vpon the temporall inrisdiction of Rome The cardinals were but parish priests vntill such time as the Pope of a Priest became a Prince the monkes in the West church are descended from Benet of Nursia that liued about the yeare of our Lord 530. the Friers arose out of the bottomlesse pit about the yere of our Lord 1230. their first fathers were Francis and Dominicke the last brood of Friers flew abroad into the world vnder the leading of Ignatius Loyola a lame souldier anno Dom. 1540. the diuell being bound vp for a thousand yeere counting from the time of Constantine began to be loosed againe about the time of Innocent the third and by all fraud to worke in the heads of Popes Friers Monkes and Masse-priests and with violence to make opposition against all those that preached the truth The foundation therefore of Poperie being so lately laid and the chiefe founders thereof beginning to stirre so long after the times of the Apostles and ancient fathers it were great simplicitie if we should affirme poperie to be ancient But the same doth most clearely appeare by the particular doctrines of poperie which the Popes factours maintaine against vs. first they hold that holy scriptures are imperfect and no sufficient rule of faith Bellarmine lib. 4. de verbo Dei c 12. affirmeth that they are onely apart of the rule but none but heretickes in ancient time did derogate from scriptures 2. They teach that holy scriptures and the traditions of the church are to be receiued with equall affection but that was first determined in the 4. session of the conuenticle of Trent 3. In that wicked conuenticle also they first determined that the old Latine vulgar translation of the Bible should be authenticall 4. That the bishop of Rome is souereigne iudge of al controuersies of religion and the principall interpreter of scriptures is a point taught of late since Friers began to steele their faces with a double maske of impudency 5. Before the late conuenticle of Trent wee neuer read but that concupiscence was sinne both in the regenerat and vnregenerat as being contrary to the law of God 6. Stapleton in his preface to his relection of doctrinall principles is the first man that euer taught that wee heare God speaking in the Pope and that the church is founded vpon his authoritie 7. The first that euer called the Pope a God on the earth are the Popes canonists they likewise began first to call him the head and spouse of the church an vniuersall bishop 8. The Papists of late time only began to prohibit scriptures to be read publickely in vulgar tongues and to repine at Gods people that desire to reade them in those tongues for the ancient fathers exhort men to reade scriptures 9. Since Dioclesians time wee do not reade of any that burned bookes of scriptures besides Papists neither did any since his time hold out his feet to be kissed 10. Of late time Papists beleeue no Catholicke church but that which is subiect to the bishop of Rome whereas in time past the Catholicke church was held to bee dispersed through all nations and not vniuersally subiected to other head than Christ 11. The Romish church now obserueth not the old canons of the Apostles as they are commonly called ex 84. Apostolicis canonibus sayth Medina de sacror hom continent c. 105. quos Clemens Romanus pontifex eorundem Apostolorum discipulus in vnum coegit vix sex aut octo Latina Ecclesia nunc obseruat Martin Perez also de tradit part 3. c. de authorit cc. Apost confesseth that the Apostles canons now are not well obserued 12. The ancient Christians did neuer confesse their sinnes to the blessed virgin to S. Michael to Peter and Paul and other saints as the Romish Masse-priests do 13. Of late the Clerke at Masse hath taken vpon him to absolue the Priest and to pray for him a matter both strange and absurd 14. The confession of the faith set out by Pius the fourth concerning Romish traditions instification by works the seuen sacraments the sacrifice of the masse indulgences and such like points of Popery was neuer heard of before the time of that wicked Pope 15. The Papists can not shew that any Christian before of late durst cut out the second commandement out of the first Table as they haue presumed to do in their short Catechismes This they did knowing themselues to be guilty in worshipping images of the breach thereof 16. The decree of Sixtus the fourth concerning the conception of the blessed virgin without originall sinne is but a late deuice 17. It is not long since the Papists taught that veniall sinnes are done away with holy water 18. He should be very shamelesse that would say that Christians in time past did whip themselues either going in procession or before the crucifix as now Papists doe hoping to redeeme their sinnes with their owne blood 19. Ancient Christians neuer beleeued that it was sinne to transgresse
vncertaine whether the Pope be S. Peters successor and a lawfull Pope yea or no. In the Popes determinations also there is great vncerteintie and doubt for neither can the Papists that were not present in the Popes consistory beleeue for certeine that the Pope hath thus or thus determined vnlesse they will beleeue either this or that Masse-priest that telleth him so or the notary that subscribeth the decretale or the decretale it selfe nor can they assure themselues that the Popes determination is true If they beleeue euery Masse-priest or Notarie then is the faith of Papists built vpon euery pild pated Priests report or notaries subscription if they beleeue the Popes decretales because they find them written then doe they giue more credit to the Popes decretales then to holy scriptures which is most absurd and impious that the Pope determineth infallibly true how can they assure themselues seeing the scriptures pronounce all men liers and subiect to infirmities furthermore we reade that the chiese Priests vnder the law erred diuerssie as the offence of Aaron in making the golden calfe of Vriah the Priest that made an altar after the forme of that of Damascus of Annas and Caiphas that condemned Christ Iesus doth plainlie declare Peter also erred in denying his master and dissuading his passion and in Iudaizing and dissembling his religion the bishops of Rome haue erred as Lyra confesseth in Matth. 16. and may erre as Adrian lib. de sacrament c. de cōsirmat determineth The examples also of Marcellinus Liberius Felix Anastasius the 2. Vigilius Honorius the first Iohn the 23. and other Popes doe proue the same S. Augustine epist 19. doth testifie that the writers of canonical scriptures only are priuiledged so as they cannot erre of other writers he thinketh otherwise and this is also the opinion of other fathers finally reason may perswade vs to acknowledge this truth for we see no more in the bishops of Rome then other bishops and lesse then in other learned men but other bishops and learned men both haue erred and may erre if they say that Peters chaire is priuiledged then must they shew that the bishops of Antioch Alexandria which haue as much right to Peters chaire as Rome haue neuer erred but this they know cannot be done Thus we see that neither in the Romish traditions nor in the Popes decretales there is any certainty all depending of the Popes supposed determinations of which no certaintie can be had the same also may be shewed by the contrarie opinions of popish doctors in euery point of controuersie and for that all their errors are plainly conuinced both by scriptures and fathers but because they place their principall defence in the sacrifice of the Masse we will only shew their want of assurance in this point First then no Papist in the world is able to shew that either the whole Masse or the canon was instituted by Christ or the Apostles nay we see plainly words newly thrust into the forme of consecration of the cup and popish doctors themselues confesse that diuers parts of the Masse haue beene made by seuerall Popes Secondly they cannot shew for a thousand yeeres after Christ that any Priest was ordeined to offer Christes bodie and blood really for quicke and dead Lastly suppose the Masse were lawful the Priest lawful and all the rest of the lawlesse and superstitious tricks lawful yet can no man assure himselfe that the Priest hath truely consecrated for first no man can tell whether the man at the altar be a Priest vnlesse he know that he was baptized and that the bishop ordring him had an intention to doe it Secondly no man can assure himselfe that either he had an intention to consecrate or pronounced the wordes of consecration or not for they are pronounced softly Are not the Papistes then miserable who are so vncertaine of their Masse and know not whether they worship bread or God whether they serue God or creatures whether they be Christians or idolaters CHAP. XXXIIII That Popery is repugnant to the lawes of Nations BVt could the Papists perswade themselues that their Massing sacrifice were lawfull and the rest of their religion were true yet who would not abhorre that religion which is grounded on such foundations and conteineth such impieties heresies and false doctrines and is so repugnant both to Catholike religion and all antiquity Further we finde that it ouerthroweth the lawes of nations dissolueth the bands of alliance and kinred preiudiceth the authoritie of Kings and Princes hazardeth their liues and persons oppresseth the liberty of Christians both for matters of conscience and their temporall estate and is maintained by lies calumniations forgeries periuries fire and sword and most dishonest and wicked means The lawes of nations require that oathes promises compactes leagues and treaties of trade and commerce be obserued and kept but all these bonds neither Popes nor Papists regard Formosus being deposed from his bishopricke swore that he would neuer resume the same againe yet regarded he not his oath Gregorie the 7. was made Pope contrarie to his oath as appeareth in the life of Henrie the 4. Paschal the 2. solemnely swore to Henry the Emperor to obserue certeine articles agreed vpon betwixt them but he was no soner out of his hands but he broke his oath rebelled against the Emperor and excommunicated him Charles the French King as Theodoric a Niem testifieth tract nemor vnion 6. c. 14. chargeth Gregory the 12. and Benedict the 13. with violating their oathes vowes and promises Violarunt sidem saith he fregerunt votum promissum non tenucrunt Omiphrius chargeth Alexander the 6. with more then Punicke persidiousnesse persidia plus quam punica Guicciardin in his history speaking of Clement the 7. saith he regarded his oath but little era di poca sede he sheweth also how Iulius the second endeuored to prooue that the church that is the Pope as he meant was not bound by any oath and that appeareth to haue beene most currant doctrine by diuers perfidious prankes plaied by Leo the 10. Clement the 7. and diuers other Popes mentioned by Onuphrius and diuers of the Popes owne friends and parasites Neither doe they only breake oathes themselues but perswade all their complices to doe the like the Bishop of Verdune as we reade in Conradus Traiectensis relateth how Gregory the 7. esteemed faith to be sacrilege and them to bee loyall that broke their othes to the emperor periuria sidelitatem dicit fidem sacrilegium sacit Henry the 4. also as we read in Helmoldus complained that his subsects by the instigation of the Pope rebelled against their lord and broke their saith and solemne oathes lenarunt manus contra dominum regem suum violauerunt sidem iuramentorum sacramenta In the councell of Constance the Pope and his complices persuaded the emperor most dishonorably to violate his safe conduct granted to Iohn Husse there also it was decreed that faith was
church of late time by the Popish faction in England France Flanders Italy and else-where we reade that diuers haue beene betraied by their owne kinsfolks brethren and friends and finde that fulfilled which our Sauior Christ foretold vs Luc. 21. how Christians should be betraied of their parents brethren kinsmen and friends In Spayne they force parents to bring woode to burne their children and children to set fire to their parents Alphonsus Dias came poste from Rome and caused his owne brother to be murdred for that he had embraced true religion it is reported that in England Queene Marie if she had liued any longer would haue caused the bones of her owne father to haue beene digged vp and burned It is also a common practise of children in places where Popery reigneth to abandon their parents and to professe monkerie Airault of Angiers in France a man of good note lost his onely sonne by the entisement of the Iebusites perswaded to enter into their superstitious order neither could the father euer after heare what was become of him and so haue many parents beene depriued of their sonnes and daughters vnder colour of religion oftentimes drawen away to serue the Masse-priests abominable lustes this among Papists is counted religion but the example sauoureth rather of Turkish then Christian religion for as the children of Christians are taken from their parents and friends and made Ianizars and so emploied in the warres against Christians so these nouices are by fraud and wilie deuises stollen from their Christian parents and friends and afterward emploied in the defence of antichristian doctrine against truth and the professors thereof Finally they that professe Popery zealously doe forget oftentimes all lawes of common ciuility lately the pouder-men Papists had thought to cut all their countrimens throtes the Masle-priests esteeme lay-men no otherwise then dogges and hogges commonly when they appeare before magistrates that are not of their owne religion they giue them no reuerence Alexander the third trode vpon the Emperor Fredericke Barbarossaes necke Adrian the 4. suffered him to hold his stirrop other Popes haue vsed Kings and Princes as their stassiers and for their hands they giue Christians their feete to kisse Neither is this a fault of the practise but also of the doctrine of Popery for these facts they commonly defend and forbid al speech communication dealing with excommunicate persons os orare vale communio mensa negatur saith Nauarrus in enchirid c. 27. these words spoken of Leui Deuter. 33. which said to his father and mother I know you not are applied to all that enter into any order of monkish religion as we may perceiue by the doctrine of Bellarmine lib. de monach c. 36. Whosoeuer therefore looketh for filiall obedience at the hands of his children had neede â—o looke that they be not nouzled in Popery whoso expecteth for kind and frindly vsage must not consort himselfe with Papists who towards Christians vse neither respect of kinred nor of friendship vpon euery warrant of the Pope take themselues absolued from their obedience to their superiors whether they rule in church or common welth and by all meanes suppose themselues bound to cut Christian mens throts CHAP. XXXVI That Popish religion either disannulleth or greatly preiudiceth the authoritie of Kings and Princes CHristian religion doth giue an eminent authority and prerogatiue to Kings S. Peter 1. epist 2. exosteth all Christians to subinit themselues vnto them and S. Paul Rom. 13. teacheth euery soule to be subiect to the higher powers Tertullian in his treatise ad Scapulam sheweth that the Emperor was next vnder God supreme gouernor colimus imperatorem saith he sic quomodo nobis licet ipsi expedit vt hominem a deo secundum we honour the Emperour c. as a man that hath the next place to God can we then with any reason suppose Popery to sauour of Christian religion that either maketh the Emperour and other Kings subiect to the Pope or else taketh awaie a great part of his authoritie That the Papists hold all temporall Princes to bee inferiour and subiect to the Pope it cannot be denied Innocentius the third in c. solitae de maior obed disputing this matter compareth the Pope to the Sunne and the Emperour to the Moone as if the Emperour were as many degrees inferior to the Pope as the Moone is to the Sunne quanta est inter solem lunam tanta inter pontifices reges differentia cognoscitur Clement the sift in the chapter Romani principes de iureiurando declareth that the Emperors of Rome haue submitted their heads to the bishop of Rome sua submittere capita non reputarunt indignum againe he sheweth how they ought to take an oath of fealtie and obedience to the Pope The author of the Glosse in c. Romani clem de iureiurando assigneth all this subiection of Princes to Christ his institution Iesus voluit saith he In the chapter Pastoralis clem de sent reiudicat the Pope determineth that by right of the Papacie he hath superioritie ouer the Empire and that in the vacancie of the empire himselfe hath the right of the Emperour Bonisace the 8. writing to the French king gaue him to vnderstand that he was the Popes subiect both in spirituall and temporall matters scire to volumus saith he quod in spiritualibus temporalibus nobis subes in the chapter vnam sanctam extr de maior obed hee determineth that the Pope hath both the swords and that he hath power both to make kings and to depose them spiritualis potestas potestatem terrenam instituere habet iudicare si bona non fuerit that is the spirituall power hath right to ordeine the earthly power and to iudge the same if it be not good Iosephus Vestanus lib. de osculat pedum Pontisicis p. 137. among the dictates of Gregory the 7. setteth downe this for one that it is lawfull for the Pope to depose the Emperour Pius the fist in his blundring bull against Queene Elizabeth our late dread soueraigne blusheth not to affirme that the Pope alone is made a Prince and set ouer all nations and kingdomes to pull vp to destroy to dissipate and spaile to plant and to build hunc vnum saith he super omnes gentes ommae regna principeÌ„ constituit qui cuellat destruat dissipet disperdat plantet aedisicet This also is the doctrine of modern Iebusites and their complices Bellarm. lib. 5. de Pontis Rom. c. 6. speaking of the Pope teacheth that he hath power to change kingdomes and to take from one and to giue to another if it be necessary for saning soules and this he offreth to prooue Potest mutare regna saith he vni auferre atque altericonserre si id necessarium sit ad animarum salutem vt probabimus The Iebusites of France in a discourse intitled la veritè defendue blush not to defend the Popes vsurped power in
doe not see in what danger they stand either to be disgraced or dispossessed of their crownes disgrace it is to acknowledge any in earth their superiour and an euident danger to fall out with the Pope where the subiects are affected to Popery CHAP. XXXVII That Kings professing Popish religion are either no Kings or but halfe Kings BVt were not Kings in danger to lose their crownes and Kingdomes liuing vnder the Pope yet haue they no reason to take vpon themselues as free Kings and Princes or to beleeue that they can enioy all the right that belongeth to lawfull Kings and Princes For first no King can freely dispose of matters belonging to his gouernement that acknoledgeth any man to be his superior as for example Herode and other Kings that ruled vnder the Romans who could proceed no further then pleased the Emperors and people of Rome if then the King of Spaine or France or other nations do acknowledge the Pope to be his iudge and superior he may not refuse his iudgement or resist his authority Secondly we find that Kings before Christs comming in the flesh gaue lawes both to the chiefe priests and to all their people and not the chiefe priest either to the Kings of Israel and Iudah or to the people as may appeare by the lawes of Moyses Iosue Dauid Salomon Hezekia Iosiah we do also read that Constantine other Christian Kings vntill the times of Charles the great and long after gaue lawes to the Bishops of Rome and other clergy-men as may be euidently proued by the lawes yet extant Cod. de sum trinit sid cath de episc Cleric de episcop audient de haereticis and in diuers other titles and books but where any bishop of Rome all this time made any law to bind either kings or their subiects we find not vnlesse we list to admit counterfet decretales for currant lawes which no man of any vndestanding will doe nor any modest Papist can require wherefore taking vpon them authority to make lawes to binde both Kings and their subiects the Popes plainly declare that Kings lining vnder the confusion of Antichrists tyranny are no kings Thirdly Bellarmme lib. 1. de pontif Rom. c. 7. determineth that temperall Princes are no gouernors of the Church and generally both the Pope and his complices teach that kings haue no power either to make ecclesiasticall lawes or to reforme abuses of doctrine or to settle matters ecclesiasticall finally the Papists of England in their glosing petitions to his Maiesty wherein they pray his fauour yet will allow him no authority saue only in temporall and ciuill causes doth it not then manifestly appeare that Papists take from kings halfe their authority and giue the same to forreiners and publike enemies Fourthly in temporall matters which they are content to leaue to the disposition of Kings they restraine them in such sort that they wil not haue them either to rest in peace when the Pope commandeth them to make warres or to make warres further then the Pope permitteth Bomface the eight in c. vam sanctam extr de maiorit obed sheweth how princes are to vse their swords ad nutum patientiam sacerdotis that is at the Popes beck as long as he listeth to suffer it Fiftly the Pope shareth halfe the kings reuenues claiming tenths first fruits subsidies and other rights out of ecclesiasticall liuings he doth also claime the disposition of diuers ecclesiastical liuings in diuers cases and right to confirme bishops and getteth great summes of money for pardons licences and other rescripts and faculties Sixtly if a king need a dispensation against an ecclesiasticall law or an absolution from an offence he is sent to Rome to obteine it if be can and oftentimes such faculties and absolutions cost full deare King Henry the 8. spent great summes of money to be diuorced from his brothers wife and yet failed of his purpose Fredericke the 2. could not be absolued from his excommunication by Gregory the 9. but it cost him 125. M. ounces of gold as Nauclere and Iuan de Pineda a Spaniard doe signifie Iohn the king of England to obteine absolution was forced to resigne his crowne Seuenthly Alex. inder the fourth in the chapter quia nonnulli de immunit eccles in 6. exempteth the possessions and goods of clergie men from tolle and custome Finally Bomface the 8. in the chapter clericis de immunitat eccles m 6. doth excommunicate both kings and others that impose taxes and subsidies vpon the clergy and this is the common doctrine of the Popes agents Bellarmine de exemptione clericorum c. 1. setteth downe these propositions that clerkes in ecclesiasticall causes are free from the command of secular Princes by the law of God and againe that clerkes are not to be iudged of secular iudges albeit they transgresse temporall lawes and lastly that Princes in respect of clerkes are not soueraigne Princes Emanuel Sa in his Aphorismes for confessaries first printed and alledged by him that wrote the Franke discourse hath these wordes clerici rebellio in regem non est crimen laesaemaiestatis quia non est subditus regi the rebellion of a clerke against the king is no treason because he is not the kings subiect nay of late both the masse-priests and their firie followers haue thought it meritorious to rebell against the king And consonant to this doctrine is the practise of papists for in matters of contention betwixt the Pope and their kings they take part with the Pope and rebell against their kings as the rebellions of the Germaines and French in time past of the English and Irish against king Henry the 8. and Queene Elizabeth of the leaguers of France against king Henry the 3. and 4. doe manifestly declare When the Pope doth giue law to Princes they take themselues bound to execute it and vpon euery excommunication rise in armes against them and seeke to depose them In ecclesiasticall causes they runne for direction to the Pope and care not a straw for the ecclesiasticall lawes of their kings When the Pope commandeth a Prince to execute his bulles they are ready to follow the warres if he command them to surcease they forsake their kings in the midst of his conquests If the Pope leuy tenthes or subsidies vpon the clergy or Monkes or Friers they willingly beare all burthens and to him they runne for dispensations and all faculties Kings also seeke to the Pope in their owne cases for dispensations and absolutions where the Popes law saith they are necessarie Finally both the possessions and persons of clergy men are the Popes to dispose as may appeare for that he layeth what charge he listeth on their possessions and sometimes alienateth them to mainteine his warres and findeth their persons prest to doe him seruice If then kings beare themselues as inferiors to the Pope and receiue lawes at his hands and are excluded from all disposition and rule in ecclesiasticall causes and
halfe their authority Thirdly Bellarmine and others exempt the persons of the Clergie from the iurisdiction of temporall Lords doth it not then appeare that popish kings are Commanders but of one halfe of their subiects Lastlie they doe exempt the goods of the clergie from the disposition of the Prince so we may see that the King loseth halfe his reuenues where popish religion beareth swaie To conclude therefore it is apparent by the premisses that all true Papists professing and practising the Popes doctrine are vtter enemies and in hart euill affected to Kings professing a contrary religion and depend on strange and forreine Princes rather then vpon their owne Kings well they may temporize hauing dispensations for it but if opportunity bee offred to the Pope and his faction to shew their malice we may assure our selues we shall finde them like our English powder-men that is traitors and enemies of the prince and state and Kings professing Popery are but the Popes vassals and vnderlings and during the Popes good will and pleasure further they haue but halfe their kingly authority and rule but halfe their subiects and lose halfe their reuenues which whosoeuer either teacheth or alloweth he may say and sweare obedience in temporall matters as long as he list but wise men will neuer hold him for other then a temporary and vndutifull subiect CHAP. LIIII That such Papists as positiuely hold all the hereticall and false doctrines of the moderne church of Rome cannot possiblie be saued THere are many false prophets gone out into the world saith S. Iohn 1. epist. 4. speaking of his times and Reuelat. 9. he telleth vs that in the later times of the church a starre shall fall from heauen and that he that is signified by that starre shal open the bottomlesse pit out of the smoke wherof shall come locustes that haue haire like women teeth like lions habergeons of iron and tailes like scorpions we may not therefore thinke but that now also false prophets are stirring abroad and that swarmes of locustes are flying in euery kingdome seeking by glozing pretence to deceiue the simple by viperous calumniations to bite true teachers with armes to oppugne princes and with the poison and reliques of their herolies to sting and hurt all that shall professe the trueth The Iebusites and their consorts the friers and Masse-priests pretend the sauing of mens soules but they are false teachers and the very locustes mentioned by S. Iohn and sent foorth by the Pope designed by the starre Apocalyps 9. let all Papists therefore beware how they listen to their heriticall and damnable doctrine which who so beleeueth and followeth positiuely cannot be saned The word of God is true If any man saith Iohn Ren. 14. worship the beast and his image and receiue his marke in his forehead or in his hand the same shall drinke of the wine of the wrath of God afterward he saith hee shall be tormented in fire and brimstome before the holy Angels and before the Lambe but whosoeuer is reconciled to the Pope and submitteth himselfe to the lawes and kingdome of antichrist doth worship the beast and his image whosoeuer openly professeth Popery receiueth the Popes marke in his forehead whosoeuer yeeldeth to the practise of Romish religion receiueth his marke in his hand let Papistes therefore stand vpon their guard and looke well to their consciences for albeit Sanders and Bellarmine with all their skill haue endeuoured to prooue that the Pope is not antichrist yet all Bellarmines wrangling discourse is refuted in my fift booke de Pontif. Rom. and Sanders his demonstrations stande also dissolued by M. Whitakers of pious memory beside that neither they nor any of their consorts can assigne any other state vnto whom these prophesies may so well agree as to the Pope and his kingdome if then our reasons cannot resolue them yet the perplexitie of our aduersities in this controuersie may helpe to informe them and perswade them that the beast there spoken of is the Pope and that his image is the Romish gouernment whereby the old empire of Rome is in a certaine sort represented and restored Furthermore Apocalyps 22. we finde that dogges enchanters whoremongers murtherers idolaters and whosoeuer loueth or maketh lies shal be excluded out of the kingdome of heauen but like to dogges the Pope and his adherents refuse Gods word preached vnto them and teare them in pieces that seeke to feed them with the bread of life diuers of the Popes haue beene great Magicians Necromancers and Enchanters as Benet the 9. Gregory the 6. and 7. Syluester the 2. Paul the 3. and many of their followers follow also but too much this damnable practise the Masse-priests like cunning enchanters suppose that bread and wine is turned into flesh and blood in their magicall Masses they permit publike stewes keepe concubines and to monkes friers and masse-priests forbid lawfull marriage they haue murdred and massacred millions of Christians to erect and vphold their antichristian kingdome the 5. of Nouember last they attempted a treason neuer before heard of minding to murder the King his Lords and the Commons assembled in parliament and to massacre all opposite to them throughout the realme they erect idols in churches and euerie corner of their streetes and in high waies giuing latriam and diuine honour to the crosse and to the images of the Trinitie and calling the Sacrament their Lord and God and making vowes praiers confessions to saints and burning incense to images and saying Masse in the honour of saints and angels finally they doe not onely forge standers against M. Luther Zuinglius Caluin and other true teachers but also against vs all as if we taught that God is the author of sinne and that Christ despaired that there is no hell but horror of conscience and such like abhominable doctrines which we expresly detest they giue out also that we condemne good works and teach rebellion and their hearers delight to heare these lies S. Paul hauing rehearsed diuers works of the flesh Gal. 5. and namely adultery fornication vncleannesse wantonnesse idolatrie witchcraft and diuers others of that nature and among the rest heresie seditions he concludeth that those that doe such things shall not inherite the kingdome of God but neuer was any sect more subject to these workes of the flesh then the Papists their idolatries heresies rebellions murders and witchcraft I haue before noted adultery and fornication they account to be small sinnes c. at si clerici de indicijs their vnnaturall lustes are testified in diuers records and bookes their clergie cannot choose but be vncleane when they resuse marriage and forsweare it their massacres and murders and rebellions are recorded in many histories and the memory thereof will now be recorded in actes of parliament that they allow publike stewes themselues deny not and doe they thinke that wallowing like swine in their fleshly workes they shall be saued Athanasius in the end of his Creed saith it is
all the fathers almost denie publicke penance to Priests and Deacons fallen into notorious crimes but the popish faction regardeth them not one iote Bellarmine lib. 1. de eucharist c. 11. saith that Augustine did not well weigh these words of Luke I will drinke no more of the fruit of the vine Augustine lib. 22. de ciuit Dei c. 10. saith that Christians doe not worship martyrs or erect remples in their honour lib. 1. de morib eccles c. 3. he denieth that we are to adore any ereature Hierome also ioineth with him in this opinion mepist ad Riparium but the popish sect doth not regard what they say nor followeth their doctrine Finally it were an easie matter to shew the fathers to bee aduerse to popery in all materiall controuersies but what shall wee neede to doe it seeing their late corruptions and false allegations of fathers doe plainlie testifie that they doe not hope for victory if the fathers may be truely alleadged of late they haue set out indexes expurgatory teaching Printers how to falsifie fathers Sixtus Senensis inepist ad Pium 5. ante biblioth sanct sheweth how that Pope had caused the fathers to bee purged or rather corrupted expurgari fecisti omnium authorum catholicorum saith he praecipuè veterum patrum scripta Pameluts hath most shamefully corrupted Cyprian and the like course all Papists take with the bookes of the fathers lately set foorth Somtime also they confesse the corruption of fathers Aeneas Sylu. lib. 1. de gest concil Basil sheweth how Popes stand vpon these words vocaberis Cephas and lanch into the deepe and such like neglecting the exposition of all the holy doctors posthabitis omnino omnium sanctorum expositionibus Alan Chartier saith they reiect the holy doctrine of fathers sanctâ—â— patrum doctrine reiectae posthabitae sunt Matth. Paris in Wilhelmo Conquest speaking of Hildebrandes decree against maried Priests saith it was made without consideration and against the iudgement of holy fathers inconsiderato iudicio contra sanctorum patrum sententiam CHAP. XIX That Popish religion was neuer testified by the blood of Christian martyrs STrange it were if the martyrs of Christ should turne from Christ and testifie for Antichrist yet because the aduersaries of truth doe boast of ancient martyrs and Bristow in his 15. motiue doth place Martyrs as setters foorth of the Popes glorious kingdome we are briefly to shew that the testification of Martyrs maketh nothing for popish religion and that appeareth first for that the Papists refuse to bee tried by the doctrine of the Apostles which were principall Martyrs Secondly we haue shewed that the principall points of Popery were neither taught nor receiued during the time of the primitiue Martyrs nor many ages after and that many points now taught and receiued among Papists were then refused as heresies Thirdly Papists adore idols and burne incense vnto them but the ancient Martyrs were therefore martyred cruelly put to death because they would not consent to the worship of idols nor burne incense to them Fourthly the practises of Papists declare that they are more like to the heathen Emperors and persecutors of Christians then to the ancient martyrs of Christs church for as they massacred Christians for maintenance of the Apostolike faith so do the Popes and their complices massacre all that stand for the same as they by sword and fire sought to vphold idolatry so doe these as they hated them deadly which taught the true faith so doe these Finally the confession of the faith published by Pius the fourth and that doctrine which the conuenticle of Trent hath of late confirmed and commanded to be taught and beleeued is in many points contrarie to the faith of ancient martyrs and in all points of controuersie betwixt Papists and vs vtterly vnknowne to them The holy Apostles commend scriptures and so doe ancient martyrs but Papists accuse them of insufficiencie obscuritie flexibility and call them a nose of waxe and a killing letter Ancient martyrs were burned and put to death because they would not deliuer holy scriptures to be burnt the Papists doe burne scriptures and suspect such for heretikes as reade them in vulgar tongues The Apostles and Primitiue martyrs beleeued the scriptures because they came from God the Papists will not haue scriptures to bee belecued vnlesse they be deliuered by the Pope They taught neither heresie nor impiety nor noueltie but Popish religion as before is declared is full of heresies impieties nouelties In ancient time the Bishops of Rome were martyrs now those that call themselues their successors doe murder Gods Saints and make them martyrs Ancient martyrs taught that one God was to bee adored the Papists giue diuine honour to the crosse and crucifixe and call the Sacrament their Lord and God Ancient martyrs did breake downe images now the Papists erect them fall downe before them and worship them Finally ancient martyrs neuer beleeued that either doggs or hogs could eate Christs body or that the same was in any place where it could neither be felt nor seene or that the same was both in heauen and earth and euery pixe at one time or that bread is transubstaÌ„tiated into Christs body or that Christians do with their teeth eate mans flesh or with their throats swallow mans blood or that the bishop of Rome is lord and monarch of the church or that he can fetch souls out of Purgatorie or that there is a treasure of Saints merites out of which indulgences are granted or that Christians are iustified by extreme vnction or eating fish and such like Popish deuises Neither is it materiall that these holy martyrs are put in Popish calenders for the Iewes bragged of their father Abraham and adorned the sepulchers of the Prophets although they neither abode in the faith of Abraham nor followed the doctrine of the Prophets Further Bristow telleth vs that S. Stephen helped all those that sought vnto him but his proofes are drawne out of legendes and certeine counterset sermons of S. Augustine in his 22. chapter de ciuit dei c. 8. there is no such matter and yet these reports that are there inserted seeme to be none of S. Augustines but suppose certein superstitious persoÌ„s should pray to S. Stephen yet S. Stephen neuer taught them so to do nor allowed such formes of praiers Lastly he talketh of Fisher More the Charterhouse monks and diuers that died in king Henry the 8. the late Queens reigne for the Popes cause and telleth vs that they were of his religion but it is first denied that they were martyrs and next that Fisher and More were of the moderne Romish religion the first is proued for that they died for the Pope and not for Christ Secondly they died as traitors either by open rebellion or by ouert act oppugning the Princes authoritie the second is euident for that diuers of them died before the conuenticle of Trent which hath now published a new forme of faith and decreed many things
which then were not knowen nor beleeued as matters of faith these fellowes therefore are liker the Martyrian heretikes then to Christs martyrs and if they be honored of any it is of rebels leaguers and traitors combined with the Pope and forrein enemies against their Prince and countrie so likewise the Circūcellions were honored of their consorts as martyrs yet Augustine epist 58. speaking of them saith they liued as robbers and were honored as martyrs viuebant vt latrones honorabantur vt martyres CHAP. XX. That Popery is a meere humane deuise and not in any sort to be deduced or proued out of holy scriptures In matters of religion we are diligently to take heede that we passe not beyond the commandements of God vpon whose word only all true religion is founded Whatsoeuer I command you saith Moyses Deut. 12. take heede you doe it you shall put nothing thereto nor take ought therefrom our Sauiour Christ Matth. 15. telleth vs that they worship God in vaine that teach for doctrines mens precepts finally the apostle Coloss 2. condemneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or voluntary worship taken vp by men without warrant and well doth the old Latine interpreter of the bible translate that word superstition let vs then a litle consider whether Popish religion be deriued out of holy scriptures or else bee onlie a packe of humane deuises The masse as our aduersaries themselues confesse was framed at seuerall times and by diuers authors Polydore de inuentorib lib. 5. c. 10. saith S. Peter after consecration vsed only the Lords prayer and that S. Iames and S. Basil did encrease the mysteries out of Walasridus Platina Naucler and others we reade that Caelestine made the introit beginning iudica me deus that Damasus added the confession said by the Priest and Gregory the Antiphona and Kyris eleeson and Telesp horus Gloria in excelsis and Gelasius certaine oraysons or clauses of oray sons and the praier te igitur and Syricius communicantes and so we see how it was peeced by little and litle In the consecration of the cuppe they haue added to the words of our Sauiour the words aeterni and mysterium fidei Innocentius c. cum Marthae de celebrat missar saith first that they were added by the Apostles albeit not found in the gospell as if it were not a simple matter to thinke that they did not write that which they thought sufficient he saith again that they are proued out of the words of the Gospel but his proofes are ridiculous for he must shew that these words were vsed where they are placed which he doth not so much as once endeuor to doe The Masses in honour of Saints and Angels are deuised by men and that very lately Thomas Aquinas as is said deuised the office said on corpus Christi day who deuised the masses and offices said in honour of S. Francis and S. Dominicke and other late Saints the Papists themselues doe not know The Psalter of our Lady as some thinke was deuised by Bonauenture her Offices are of a latter stampe all are meere humane deuises without any ground of scripture That Priests offer Christ to his father for the sinnes of quicke and dead nay for sicke horses and pigges and whatsoeuer necessities else can be imagined is a deuise of man and no way to be iustified by Christs institution Christ instituting baptisme said baptize and not spit and salt and grease and light candles he said also to his Disciples being present take and eate and not gape and gaze the ceremonies therefore vsed in baptisme and in the masse by Papists proceed not out of Gods word It is also a meere humane deuise that no Priest may say Masse without water and fire and is prescribed not by euangelicall authority but by the Pope in the chap. literas tuas de celebrat missar The worship of the sacrament and the custody thereof in a pixe dependeth on the decretale Sane cum olim de celebrat miss and was first brought in and inuented by Honorius the third The practise of Priests in saying canonicall houres commeth from no canon of scripture but from the constitution presbyter de celebrat missar In ancient time the reliques of martyrs were buried in the ground and might not be touched but humane curiosity hath thought it better now to dig them out of the ground and to place them in the altar and to worship them and that without any instruction or direction of holy scriptures Popish litanies wherein Papists pray to Angels Saints and sometime to those which are no Saints are diuers from the formes of praiers prescribed in scriptures and lately brought in by the deuise of superstitious Monkes Friers and Masse-priests Benet Francis Dominicke and other authors of feined religions tooke not their rules from the Gospel but thought they could frame a more perfect religion then the Gospell The Popes triple crowne guard of Suizzers crossed slipper and such like deuises will hardly be found in the writings of the Apostles S. Peter certes neuer wore any such crown nor had any such guard Where they praie to the crosse in the breuiarie and say increase righteousnesse in the godly and grant pardon to sinners they doe it of their owne head and shall neuer find any such praier in scriptures Boniface the eight first ordeined the feast of the Iubiley and Clement the fifth appointed the feast of corpus Christi but if you aske their warrant they will shew you some other authority than from the Apostles Sixtus quartus ordained the feast of our Ladies conception and another Pope of her assumption but both vpon false grounds supposing that she was conceiued without sin and that her bodie was taken vp into heauen they maintain the same also by lies and apocryphall fables Finallie it is an easie matter to shew that the formes and signes of popish confirmation extreme vnction and other new made sacraments are prescribed by Popes and their adherents without warrant of holy scripture CHAP. XXI That popish religion in diuers points is directly contrary to holy scriptures NEither is popery only destitute of warrant out of scriptures but also directly contrarie in some points to holy scriptures In the law Deut. 12. we are expressely forbidden to adde to the law of God or to take from it The Papists offend both waies for to the lawes of God they adde the precepts of the Romish church and decretales of Popes and say they binde the conscience they doe also cut out the second commandement concerning the worship of images as their short catechismes and primers doe testifie and by false interpretations corrupt Gods law In the first commandement we are forbidden to haue other Gods beside the God of heauen and earth but the Masse-priests as before is declared call the sacrament their Lord and God and honour the Pope as a God on earth and giue diuine honour to creatures which is as much as if they should expresselie command their