Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	believe_v	church_n	tell_v	2,230	5	6.0616	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13155	An abridgement or suruey of poperie conteining a compendious declaration of the grounds, doctrines, beginnings, proceedings, impieties, falsities, contradictions, absurdities, fooleries, and other manifold abuses of that religion, which the Pope and his complices doe now mainteine, and vvherewith they haue corrupted and deformed the true Christian faith, opposed vnto Matthew Kellisons Suruey of the new religion, as he calleth it, and all his malicious inuectiues and lies, by Matthevv Sutcliffe.	Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629.	1606 (1606)	STC 23448; ESTC S117929	224,206	342

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 canō 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 sl●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

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

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

and that none taught in those countries beside S. Peter and such as he sent a lie directly repugnant to Scriptures which testifie that S. Paul preached in those countries being appointed by God thereto and not by man and refuted by diuers ancient histories and fathers who write that diuers others preached there beside S. Peters priests and messengers S. Augustine epist 162. sheweth that the Gospel came into Aphrike out of other countries then those that belonged to the church of Rome Gregory the 4. c. in praeceptis dist 12. saith that all bishops causes and the discussing of matters of religion belongeth to the See of Rome and that religion tooke her beginning from thence a matter apparantly false for religion began at Hierusalem and not at Rome and Councels in ancient time determined the differents in causes of Religion and not the bishop of Rome who was as well subiect to the decision of the general councell as other bishops Anacletus c. in nouo dist 21. saith that the rest of the Apostles made Peter their Prince which is contradicted by the Papistes themselues that deriue Peters authoritie from Christ. Nicolas dist 22. c. omnes telleth vs that Christ gaue to Peter the right of the kingdome both of heduen and earth but of this earthly kingdome belonging to Peter this is the first man that euer told newes Anacletus dist 22. c. sacrosancta affirmeth that both Peter and Paul were crowned with martyrdome in one day and at the some time but this leasing is refuted by Prudentius peri stephan Hymno 12. Arator in act Apost lib. 2. Augustine serm 18. de sanctis and others Innocent the 4. c. ad apostolicae de sent re iudicat affirmeth that Sicily is the speciall patrimony of Peter est speciale patrimonium Petri. but no where doe were reade where either Christ gaue or Peter claimed this patrimony Clement the fifth c. Romani Clem. de iureiurando most boldly and impudently writeth that Emperors hauing the crowne set vpon their heads sweare fealty to the Pope a matter certes which Bellarmine the Popes proctor would blush to affirme for albeit he would willingly gratifie the Pope whith any thing yet dare he not say that the Roman Empire is holden in fee of the Pope and thus the Popes runne on headlong heaping priuileges on Rome and building the tower of Babel by lies The same is also practised by Bellarmine as I haue shewed in diuers discourses written against him by Baromus as my speciall exceptions taken to his volumes fraught with lies and fables do declare by Parsons and Kellison as by my answeres to their bookes it may appeare Turrecremata lib. 3. sum c. 9. affirmeth that Helena and 3000. Iewes were conuerted to Christian religion in a councell at Rome vnder Siluester but other more true stories report that she was alwares a Christian and holpe to conuert her sonne Constantine Lib. 2. sum c. 300. he saith that Paul did some things which he afterward retracted quaedam fecit quae postea reuocauit The Emperor Henry the fourth by the Romanists is most vniustly standred as if he had prostituted his owne wife to his sonne and done other such like abominable actes matters merely deuised by the Popes agents Fridericke the 2. was a most noble Prince and greatly praised by the Cardinall of Cusa Aegidius Romanus and others yet was he most vniustly reuiled and standred by Gregory the 9. Innocent the 4. and their agents as it doth appeare by the testimony of Matthew Paris in Henrico 3. Capgraue telleth how a hundred and fifty of Ioseph of Arimathaea his company sailed out of France into great Britany vpon Iosephes shirt a small barge certes for so many passengers Antoninus hist part 3. reporteth how an innumerable troupe of the order of Dominske were seene in heauen couered vnder the blessed virgins gowne Stapleton in his prompruarie dominica 2. aduentus brocheth vs a barrell of lies first he saith that Sebastian a certeine musician was put in prison for demaunding liberty of conscience by the last Queene and that one Gifford was imprisoned by her likewise for the same cause after he had enterteined the Queene very bountifully at his house and that Shelley was committed for presenting a request in the behalfe of the papists matters meerely imagined and deuised by lying companions and foolishly reported by him the two first we cannot learne euer to haue beene committed the third was imprisoned for plaine treason The Papists accused the people of Zuricke for teaching that the virgine Mary had more sonnes then one and that Iames died for them as we may reade in Sleidan lib. hist. 4. and Bellarmine lib. 4. de iustific c. 1. saith we little regard good works and lib. 2. de amiss grat c. 1. he accuseth the Albrgians as they are called and Caluin for holding the error of the Manichecs which they alwaies renounced and detested In his bo●ke de Matrimonio c. 2. he blusheth not to charge them whom he calleth Lutherans and Caluinists with holding that matrimonie is not of God a point expresly denied by them Finally it is an easie matter to shew that the foundation of Popery is laid vpon lies and that the charge which Papistes giue vpon their aduersaries is ordinarily enforced by most wicked imputations and standers CHAP. XLIIII That the cause of Popery is mainteined by fire and sword MVch are simple people abused by calumniations deuised against good men and hardly are Christians able to discerne falshood from truth and to iudge what is truely alledged what falsly vntill such time as matters be duly examined yet neither can trueth be vtterly suppressed nor do lies passe alwaies for good paiment Those therefore whom they cannot abuse with lies and false allegations the Pope and his complices seek cruelly to destroy with fire and sword The holy Ghost Apocalyps 17. sheweth vs that the purple whoore should be drunke with the blood of the saints and Apocalyp 13. that the 2. beast should kill such as would not worship the image of the beast that is that the Pope should persecute to the death such as would not submitte themselues to the kingdome of Antichrist in which the image of the Roman Empire was after a sort reuiued and this wee see verified by experience in the cruell gouernement of the Popes of Rome and their adherents Their lawes against all such as dissent from them in opinion concerning the sacraments are most rigorous they are degraded and deliuered ouer to the secular power to be burned as it appeareth by the law ad abolendam de haereticis nay they punish such as are suspected if they cannot cleere themselues with no lesse rigor then the rest all that communicat with them receiue them or succor them are in great danger such as giue them counsell are reputed infamous as is determined c. si aduersus de haereticis the goods of heretikes are adiudged confiscate neither are they punished only while they liue but also