practice Their principles are these As long as the Prince continueth excommunicate the Subiect is freed from the oath of subiection this is the Position of a Cardinall whose authority was so great in the Church of Rome that whatsoeuer he wrote was allowed as sound and authenticall without examination or supervizing To him I adde a Bishop whose writings after supervision and examination were approued as Catholique doctrine and to containe in them nothing contrary to the receiued faith of the Romane Church his Position is this Assoone as a Christian King becomes hereticall forthwith people are freed from their subiection The condition in the first Position is if the King be excommunicate in the second if he be hereticall which though different in termes yet in substance are all one for euery heretique is excommunicate quatenus apertè haereticus in that he is an open heretique if not by name yet in deed and by right and so Subiects may lawfully deny him obedience saith another Iesuite and what is an hereticke in their diuinity I pray you Marry Whosoeuer maintaineth any doctrine expresly condemned by the Church of Rome hee is to be accounted say they an obstinate hereticke To these adde the sentence of another Cardinall euen our owne Countriman Al in his Apology for Stanlies treason who ioyneth both these two conditions together as two twinnes By reason saith he of Queene Elizabeths excommunication and heresie it was not onely lawfull for any of her Subiects but euen they were bound in conscience to depriue her of any strength which lay in their power to doe and to deliuer her Armies Townes or fortresses into her enemies hands she no more being the right owner of them But all this while we haue not the pillar of Popery Bellarmine it may be he is of another mind heare therefore his resolution Non licet Christianis tolerare c. It is not lawfull for Christians to tolerate a King that is an infidell or an heretike if he endeuour to draw his Subiects to his heresie or infidelity This is braue Bellarmines resolution of this case Neither doth he barely set it downe but laboureth to proue it by many arguments throughout that whole Chapter indeed he pinneth it all vpon the Popes sleeue he must pronounce the King to be an heretike and they like sheepe must auoyde him as a wolfe he must forbid them to obey and they must forthwith fall to rebellion that whole seuenth Chapter is worth the reading if any desire to know the full and compleat doctrine of the Romish Church concerning the poynt of rebellion and treason against Princes And that this was the doctrine not of some few among them but of all in generall Let a Fryer of their owne testifie about three hundred yeares since Sigebert mencioning the Popes proceeding against Henry the Emperor thus writeth Be it spoken with the leaue of all good men this nouelty that I say not heresie had not as yet sprung vp in the world that Gods Priests should teach the people that they owe no subiection to euill Princes and though they haue sworne allegeance to them yet they owe them no fidelity neither shall hee be accounted periur'd which thinketh against the King yea hee that obeyeth him shall be counted for excommunicate and he that doth against him shall be absolued from the guilt of iniustice and periurie Here we may behold the doctrine of that age and withall that by this Fryers iudgement concurring with vs it is not onely nouelty but a point of heresie to dissolue the bond of allegeāce which Subiects owe vnto their Princes vpon any pretence whatsoeuer 3. But all these are but the opinions of priuate men and not the decrees of the Church heare therefore what the Church speaketh by the pretended head thereof the Pope who as they affirme cannot erre whilest he sits in the chaire of Peter to determine matters of faith Gregory the seuenth alias Hildobrand thus determineth We by Apostolicall authority doe absolue all from their oaths which they haue giuen to persons excommunicate And another Pope of later time in his Bull against Queene Elizabeth thus We absolue all Subiects from their faith they haue plight with Elizabeth their Queen A third Pope Paulus Tertius did excommunicate Henry the Eight King of England and commanded his nobles to beare armes against him and to make vp the full squadron of Popes when as the Vniuersite of Salamanca determined that all Catholiques which did not forsake the defence of the English and follow the traytor One all in Ireland did sinne mortally and could not obtaine euerlasting life except they should desist Pope Xistus giueth this censure of their determination Those Diuines saith he haue done the parts of good Lawyers Confessours and Doctours Many more testimonies to this effect might be accumulated but these are sufficient because wee shall haue occasion to speake hereof more at large hereafter to all that are not either bewitched with the enchantments of the whore of Babylon or blinded with preiudice to shew how both in their principles and their practice they maintaine treason and rebellion against Princes contrary to the lawes of God of nature and of man 4. A doctrine Cousin german vnto this of the same kind though not of the same degree is that their Position touching the dissoluing of all bonds of naturall and ciuill society wherby they resolue that no communion or fellowship is to bee held with heretiques that is with Protestants by whatsoeuer bond of nature or ciuility they be obliged therevnto and therefore the Father is bound to dis-inherite and cast off his Sonne the Sonne to deny and disobey his Father the wife is forbidden to render due beneuolence to her husband the seruant is commanded to disobey his Master the debter to deny payment to his Creditor the Countriman to deny his owne Country the kinsman to disclaime his kindred if any of these be heretiques that is be Protestants What a religion is this that not only choaketh the breath of humane society but euen stifleth the life of nature it selfe Hee that desireth to see these things proued let them reade Doctor Mortons first Booke of Romish positions and practices of rebellion and also his reply vnto the moderate answere where he shall find them largely and foundly discouered and confirmed 5. Againe by their doctrine of equiuocation they teach and maintaine open and notorious lying and periury such as the very heathen of stricter life and simpler iudgement abhor'd their doctrine is this A man saith Tollet is not alwaies bound to answere according to the meaning of the asker but may sometimes vse equiuocation and deceiue the hearer this is lawfull saith he whē the Iudge requireth an oth against iustice or when he is not a competent Iudge as another speaketh as for example if the Iudge demand Hast thou done this he may answere I haue not though he
New Testament many things are wanting What can be more plaine Yet Lindanus is more plaine for he calleth Traditionem non scriptam c. The vnwritten tradition that Homericall moly which preserueth the Christian faith against the inchantments of Heretikes and the true touch-stone of true false doctrine and the Aâ—acian buckler to be opposed to all Heretikes and in conclusion the very foundation of faith To this fellow adioyne Melchior Canus as a coÌ„panion in blasphemy who saith That many things belong to Christian faith which are contained in the Scripture neither openly nor obscurely To conclude all in one summe without any further repetition of priuate mens opinions wherein much time might be spent the voyce of their whole Church represented in the Councill of Trent is this That traditions are to bee receaued pari pietate with the same reuerence and affection wherwith wee receiue the Scripture it selfe Thus wee haue a view of the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the insufficiency of the holy Scripture both in part and whole Out of all which these two impious conclusions doe necessarily arise First that traditions vnwritten are equall if not superiour in dignity and authority to the written word of God and secondly that without the helpe of them it is not able to bring vs either to a sauing faith in this life or to the end of our faith in the life to come then both which what could be spoken more iniurious either to the Word it self or to the Maiestie of that Spirit from whom it proceeded And that their blasphemy might be known â—o all men Bellarmine more like a Iulian then a Christian doth not onely affirme the Scripture to be vnsufficient and imperfect but also not simply necessary and to that end he maketh a good round discourse and bringeth in long Leaden arguments which indeed are not worth the answering for they are meere sophisticall collusions as any one of meane iudgement may easily discerne Neuerthelesse by this we may see what an honourable opinion and affection these fellowes beare towards the Scripture when as they dare to affirme that they are not simply necessary but may bee wanting and remoued without any great hurt to the Church of God 12. The third iniurious doctrine whereby open disgrace is offered to the holy Scripture is concerning the authority thereof compared with the Church for this they teach and hold That the authority of the Scripture doth depend vpon the Church and not the Church vpon the Scripture And so by consequent that the Scripture is inferiour to the Church and not the Church to the Scripture whereas we on the contrary affirme and defend that the Church wholly dependeth both for authoritie and existency vpon the Scripture and so is euery way inferiour to the Scripture and not the Scripture vpon the Church 13. This blasphemie of theirs may more euidently be discerned if we obserue what they vnderstand by the Church to wit not the Primitiue Church which was in the time and immediately after the Apostles but the succeeding and present Church and that not the whole Catholicke Church which is dispersed ouer the world but the Church of Rome which holdeth vpon the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and in this Church not the whole body but the Pastours and Prelates assembled in a Councill yea and lastly not the Councill neither but the Pope who is totus in toto all in all and in whome all the members meete and resolue themselues as lines in the center as is before declared This is their Church and to this Church of theirs they subiect the Scriptures euen the word of God to the Pope of Rome that is God himselfe to a mortall sinnefull man For as Nilâ—â— the Archbishop of Thessalonica saith To accuse the Scripture is to accuse God so to debase the Scripture is to debase God 14. That wee may see this to be true and that wee lay no false imputation to their charge heare them speake in their owne words and let Bellarmine leade the Ring If we take away saith he the authoritie of the present Church and of the Councill of Trent then the whole Christian faith may bee called in question for the truth of all ancient Councils and of all poynts of faith depend vpon the authority of the present Church of Rome Marke he saith not vpon the authority of the Scripture but of the present church of Rome where he doth manifestly preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture not onely of the Church but of the Church of Rome as if there were no Church but that and not the Church of Rome as it was in the purer and primer times but the present Church corrupted and depraued with infinite errours Againe in another place he concludeth That the Scriptures doe depend vpon the Church and not the Church on the Scriptures which position he confesseth in the same place to haue beene in other places maintained by him And yet elsewhere he disclaimeth this opinion as none of theirs and calleth it a blasphemy that it is his I haue shewed already though he be ashamed of it as he may well be and therefore exore suo by his owne iudgement he and all the rest are guilty of most grosse and intolerable blasphemie But that you may see that it is the generall receiued doctrine of them all for the most part heare others as well as him vttering their spleene against the Scriptures Siluester Prierias saith that Indulgences are warranted vnto vs not by the authority of the Scripture but by the authority of the Church and Pope of Rome which is greater And againe That the Scripture draweth it strength and authority from the Church and Bishop of Rome Eckius saith that the Scripture was not authentical but by the authority of the Church and putteth this proposition among hereticall assertions The authority of the Scripture is greater then the Church Pighius also affirmeth the same that all the authoritie of Scriptures doth necessarily depend vpon the authority of the Church and calleth all that hold the contrary in scorne Scriptuarij that is Scripture-men or such as maintaine the Scripture Cardinall Hosius goeth further and commendeth a blasphemous speech of one Hermannus as a godly saying That the Scriptures are of no more force then Aesops Fables without the testimonie of the Church and addeth presently of his owne that vnlesse the Churches authority did commend vnto vs the Canonicall Scripture it should bee of little account with vs. The like is deliuered by Coclaeus by Canus Stapleton Andradius Canisius and generally all other of that side that handle that question 15. Onely to palliate the matter they bring in a distinction to wit that this dependance of the Scriptures authority vpon the Church is quoad nos in respect of vs not quâ—adse in respect of it selfe and declaratiuè for declaration sake
Prophet Esay saying Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a sure foundation which is a playne and manifest Prophecie of Christ and not of Peter as the Apostle Peter himselfe expoundeth it where by the way we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God and the God of truth whilst to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter they wrest and peruert the Scriptures and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God to his seruant Peter and so make Peter himselfe nay the holy Ghost a Lyar. It were not credible that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart and issue out of the mouth of any but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs that in the time of Antichrist because men would not receiue the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God would send them strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes c. But to the point If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church in whom all the building being coupled together groweth vnto an holy Temple in the Lord and that not the persons but the doctrine and faith of the Apostles are those secundary foundations which the Scripture speaketh of as hath beene proued out of the Fathers then the opposition is vndefeasible namely that there is but one person the foundation of our Church which is our Lord and Sauiour the Sonne of God Christ Iesus and yet that Peters person should be the foundation of the Church also together with Christ 45. Thirdly I answere that both in truth and also in proprietie of speech there can bee but one foundation of one building those stones that are layd next to the foundation are not properly a secundary foundation but the beginning of the building vpon the foundation and for that cause when Peter and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations it cannot bee vnderstood that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church either first or second but that our Sauiour who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church and that there is none other besides him for if when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as must needes bee because the Prophets are coupled together with the Apostles which liued not in the Christian Church and therefore could not be personall foundations of it and Christ crucified is the substance of their doctrine then it must needes follow that the Apostles meaning is nothing else but that we are built vpon Christ whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it and Saint Ambrose and Anselmus who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter expoundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ and sometimes of Christ himselfe in whom he beleeued And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite and Cardinall Caietane in their commentaries vpon that place and Peter Lumbard together with the glosse vpon the place interpret And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation hath no foundation in the word of God 46. The Gospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Gospell is superiour to another of the same ranke or hath greater power and authority then another in respect of their ministerie but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees haue equall power of preaching the Gospell administring the Sacraments binding and loosing But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and ouer the whole Church and braggeth that he hath by right a title to both the swords both spirituall and temporall and that both iurisdictions doe originally pertaine to him and from him are conueyed to others c. 47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth and secondly distinguisheth hee confesseth that the Bishop of Rome hath a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted or any other doe prooue the contrary 48. To which I answere first that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity and an inequality I answere that no man denyeth it and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow hee should prooue not a bare superiority which wee confesse but a superiority in the same degree as of one Bishop to another and that in power not in execution wherein standeth the point of opposition 49. Secondly whereas he saith that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes and binding and loosing was communicated to all the Apostles yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone Feede my sheepe and To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I answere that in this hee crosseth both himselfe the Fathers and the truth himselfe for elsewhere hee confesseth that the keyes both of Order and Iurisdiction were giuen to all the Apostles indifferently and therefore it must needes follow that Tibi dabo claues was not spoken singularly to Peter but generally to them all for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all as he confesseth then without doubt he promised them to them all or else his word and his deede should not accord together And againe hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ when Mat. 28. he bade them all Goe teach and baptize and they all did put that commission in execution therefore it must needes follow that no singular power was giuen to Peter when as Christ said vnto him Feede my sheepe vnlesse we will say that the rest had not the same commission 50. The Fathers for Saint Cyprian saith plainely that all the Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power and that a primary was giuen vnto Peter that the Church might appeare to be one Saint Hilary is of the same minde You O holy and blessed men saith he for the merit of your faith haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth Saint Augustine saith that if when Christ said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen he spake onely to Peter then the Church hath not the power of the keyes but if the Church hath it then Peter receiuing the keyes represented the Church And lastly Leo one of their owne Popes confesseth asmuch when hee affirmeth that the strength of this power of the keyes passed vnto all the Apostles and the constitution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church 51. Lastly the truth for when the Apostles stroue for superiority Christ who is truth it selfe and would not haue concealed so necessary a trueth if
Dominick the other of Saint Paul were written these words On Pauls By this man you may come to Christ On Dominicks But by this man you may doe it easilier because Pauls doctrine led but to faith and the obseruation of the Commandements but Dominicks taught the obseruation of Councils which is the easier way All this and asmuch more might be produced to this purpose But I conclude the point with the censure and confession of their owne Cassander who out of the writings of William Bishop of Miniatum concludeth with him that as if officious lyes should bee added to the holy Scriptures there would remaine no authority nor weight in them So no errour nor falshood should be tolerated in Images and Pictures in the Church seeing that an errour not resisted is receiued for a trueth And in the same place the same Cassander doth bewaile the abuse of Images in the Church of Rome affirming that superstition was too much pampered thereby that Christians were nothing behind the Heathō in the extreme vanity of framing adorning and worshipping of Images Thus farre Cassander out of which we may perceiue the chiefe lessons that are learned out of these Lay bookes to wit ignorance superstition and Idolatry And therefore no maruaile if all these vices raigne in the midst of their Church as plentifully as amongst the Heathen themselues 19. Fourthly they deliuer for sound doctrine that whereas Saint Iohn sayth that they which haue the anointing of the holy Ghost know all things Hee meaneth not that euery one should haue all knowledge in himselfe personally but that euery one that is of that happy society to which Christ promised and gaue the holy Ghost is partaker of all other mens graces and gifts in the same holy Spirit to saluation And thus whereas Saint Iohn meaneth that euery true Christian both by the outward preaching of the word and by the inward vnction of the Spirit hath a distinct knowledge of all things necessary to saluation They say that it is sufficient if he be partaker of another mans knowledge though he be empty voyde himselfe Then which what can be a greater nourisher of ignorance and quencher of knowledge For if I may bee saued by anothers mans knowledge and faith And if it bee not required that I should know al things necessary to saluation in my owne person but may haue a share of another mans knowledge what need I greatly seeke for knowledge my selfe And why may I not repose the hope of my saluation vpon other men And heereby wee may obserue their grosse absurdity In the case of iustification they teach that wee are not made righteous by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs though hee bee the head of the body of the Church and the Spirit that animateth it proceedeth from him and yet heere they say that a man may be made wise and knowing by the knowledge of other their fellow members in the same body abiding in the vnity of Christs Church What is this but to aduance the members aboue the head or at least to forget themselues not caring what they say so that they maintaine the cause they haue in hand 20. I but Saint Augustine sayth If thou loue vnity for thee also hath he whosoeuer hath any thing in it it is thine which I haue it is mine which thou hast And againe in another place hee sayth When Peter wrought miracles he wrought them for me because I am in that body in which Peter wrought them In which body though the eye seeth and not the eare and the eare heareth and not the eye yet the eye heareth in the eare and the eare seeth in the eye c. Therefore all the grace and knowledge that is in any other of Gods Saints either liuing or dead is ours by participation And so that which was sufficient in them for their saluation is also enough for vs for ours though wee haue little or none of our owne Thus reason our Rhemists in the place before quoted But I answere first with our reuerend learned countrey-man Doctor Fulk that Saint Augustine vnderstandeth that place of Saint Iohn of an actuall and personall knowledge inspired by the holy Ghost concurring with the outward ministery of the Church and not of any generall knowledge infused into the Church to bee transfused and dispersed among the members by an imputatiue participation Secondly if a man may know by another mans knowledge why may not a man bee righteous by anothers righteousnesse And if the knowledge of our fellow members may bee imputed to vs that wee thereby may bee saide to know why may not the iustice of our head bee so imputed vnto vs that thereby wee may bee made iust These things are so paralell that the one being granted the other needs must follow Thirdly and lastly that communion which is betwixt the members of a body either naturall or mysticall is not an actuall translation of gifts from one to another but either a participation in the fruit of those gifts or a generating of the like in others by doctrine example exhortation prayers and such like meanes And so wee may truely say that euery one that is in the body of Christ reapeth fruit and benefit by all the graces and gifts that euer haue or shall belong to any member thereof though not for merit yet for comfort instruction edification and increase of grace And againe as one candle lighteth another and one steele sharpeneth and whetteth another So wisedome and grace is deriued from one to another either by naturall commerce of speech or patterne of example Thus much did Saint Augustine intend and no more and therefore it neuer came into his minde to thinke as these idle braines would make him that the knowledge which resided in the Saints of God is actually in all Gods Children or that they are partakers of their gifts and graces to their saluation For he that will be saued must beleeue for himselfe and know for himselfe and liue godly for himselfe If hee doe all these things by a proxy hee must also goe to Heauen by a proxy and not by himselfe This doctrine therefore is a manifest breeder and maintainer of such grosse ignorance as both Saint Augustine and all other holy men haue alwayes condemned for a sinne 21. A fift doctrine from whence ignorance springeth and ariseth is their prohibiting of Lay men to dispute touching matters of faith and that vnder paine of excommunication This Nauarre propoundeth as the doctrine of their Church neither is it contradicted by any other Aquinas goeth further and sayth that it is vnlawfull to dispute of matters of faith in the presence of those that are ignorant and simple And Bellarmine taketh away from the people all power of iudging of their Pastours doctrine saying that they must beleeue whatsoeuer they teach except they broach some new doctrin which hath not beene heard of in the Church before And if they
the child before it bee baptized is in some sort partaker of the Sacrament of Baptisme euen by the faith of the Church which hath vowed him thereunto And Bonauenture as hee is reported by Cassander sayth that infants are disposed vnto Baptisme not according to any act of their owne but according to the act of other because the mercie of God imputeth to them as their owne will the will of another Insants therefore stand still in as good case in euery respect as men of yeares if not in better both being vnbaptized and the one dedicated to God by their owne desire the other by the purpose desire of the Church and therefore either these may bee saued aswell as they or else God is not so mercifull to them as to these which is no lesse then impietie to thinke and blasphemie to pronounce 38. Another wicked consequence that followeth vpon this doctrine is that it maketh God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost euen that blessed Trinitie that is the fountaine of all truth and goodnesse to be lyars and teachers of vntruth For God the Father sayth to Abraham I will bee thy God and the God of thy seed And that this is not to bee vnderstood of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh onely to wit the Iewes but much more of his seed according to the Spirit which are faithfull Christians may appeare both by that which is in the verie same place where it is called an euerlasting couenant and by Saint Pauls testimonie who affirmeth that the blessing of Abraham was to come on the Gentiles through Christ Iesus aswell as on the Iewes God the Sonne sayth Suffer little children to come vnto me for of such is the Kingdome of Heauen plainly affirming that the Kingdome of Heauen is pertaining to little children and not barred vp against any as our Romanists teach it is against such little ones as dye without baptisme Our Sauiour saith without exception that the Kingdome of Heauen belongeth vnto them they as it were to make him a lyar bring in an exception and say that except they bee baptized not Heauen but Lymbus belongeth vnto them And the holy Ghost by the mouth of Saint Paul sayth That the children of beleeuing Parents are holy the reason is because the root is holy and therefore the branch must needs be holy and if children may be holy before they be baptized then by the same rule they may goe to Heauen before they be baptized for as no man without holinesse can see God so with holinesse none can be banished out of the sight of God And thus this doctrine giueth the lye to euery person of the blessed Trinitie 39. If they say that it is our Sauiours doctrine that except a man be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost hee cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen and therefore all those generall promises are to bee restrained by this exception if they bee baptized I answere out of Bellarmine that God is not tyed to his Sacraments but can saue them by his especiall grace as also witnesse diuers others of their learned Doctours And therefore whereas our Sauiour saith Except a man be borne againe c. it must needs be vnderstood by another exception to wit of cases of necessitie where Baptisme cannot be obtained and is not contemned for not the want but the contempt of Baptisme is damnable 40. The third and last inconuenience that ariseth from this doctrine is that it is the mother of diuers strange paradoxes and grosse absurdities as not onely of Lay mens Baptisme yea of Pagans and that in scorne but also of changing the true element into lee or broth or puddle water and that which is most strange of baptizing the childe in the mothers wombe before it bee borne or ripping vp the mothers belly in case the child be in danger of death c. some of all which absurdities are held by them all and all by some Is it not then more safe to hold that opinion which is more respectiue to Gods glorie agreeable to Christian charitie and free from all these dangerous consequences 41. To conclude omitting many other of their doctrines which might easily bee shewne to stand in the same case of dangerous tenure and hath in part alreadie beene manifested as their doctrine of set fasts implicite faith veniall sins dispensations with others more I propound for the last instance that doctrine of doctrines the verie groundcell of their ruinous Religion touching the veritie authoritie and singularitie of their Church which they vaunt and bragge to be the onely true Catholike Church of Christ and to haue a preeminence ouer the Scriptures and without the which to be no possibilitie of saluation that there is no safetie in these positions many reasons will euince as first if it should bee true that out of the bounds of that Church none could bee saued then those famous Churches of Asia which were in Pope Victors time that opposed themselues against the predominance of the Church of Rome were all damned wherein flourished many holy Martyrs that gaue vp their liues for the testimonie of Iesus Then Saint Cyprian and all the Bishops of Carthage to the number of fourescore that in a Councell at Carthage set themselues against Pope Stephen and his Councell were damned and Saint Cyprian must bee no longer a Martyr but a Schismaticke and then S. Augustine with the whole Church of Africa and troupes of Martyrs and Confessors should not bee crowned with blisse but tormented in hell for they reiected the yoke of the Bishop of Romes authoritie and would not admit that any should make appeales from them to Rome This horrible and vncharitable inconuenience doth arise from that dismall doctrine The Church of Rome is the onely Catholike Church and out of it there is no hope of saluation now that these holy and heauenly Martyrs and Confessors of Iesus Christ were out of it appeareth by their most receiued definitions of a Catholike and a Schismaticke A Catholike faith Bellarmine is he that is subiect to the one Pastor the Pope whereby hee makâ—th the essentiall forme of a Catholike to be his vnion and coniunction with his head the Pope and a Schismatike sayth Tollet is hee that doth separate himselfe from the head of the Church and the Vicar of Christ I assume but Cyprian Augustine and those other famous Bishops did not acknowledge any subiection to the Pope but separated themselues from his dominion therefore they were by their doctrine no Catholickes but Schismatickes and consequently out of the Church and so out of saluation a damnable conclusion 42. Secondly they peremptorily auouch that none of vs being not members of their Church can bee saued we on the contrarie charitably beleeue that many of them that are ignorantly members of their Church if they hold the foundation of Iesus Christ and depend vpon his merits not their owne
they deuide the word of God into verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written and vnwritten their vnwritten word is nothing but orall Traditions deliuered as they say by Christ himselfe to his Apostles alone and not to his common Disciples because it contayned the high mysteries of the Kingdome of God and by them conuayed to their successours Bishops and Elders of the Church Secondly they affirme also with them that these orall Traditions are of equall authority and necessity with the word written yea that the word written is of no authority at all quoadnos in respect of vs except it bee authorized by the tradition of the Church And thirdly they teach that the word written is imperfect vnlesse the vnwritten Cabala bee added vnto it and that not one alone but both together make a perfect rule both for faith and manners Doe they not now Iudaize in all these points Yes the Romish Apologers to proue their doctrine of traditions fetch an argument from the Iewes Cabala as may bee seene in a late tractate falsly called the Catholike Apologie which is so much the more strange because their own Sixtus Senensis professeth that the Iewish Thalmud is fraught with innumerable blasphemies against God and his Christ our Sauiour and impieties against the law of Moses besides other infinite fopperies Is not this then a good patterne for them to imitate and is it not a sound argument that is deduced from such premises Surely their traditions which they build all their superstition vpon thus symbolizing with the Iewish Cabala can be of no better credit then it is and what credit that hath not onely their Senensis before bâ—t Galatinus another stout champion of theirs acknowledgeth when he saith that it is mere madnesse to approue all their vnwritten traditions which they bragge to haue beene deliuered in mount Sinai and from thence orderly to haue descended to posterity Now that which he speaketh of the Iewes Cabala may as truly be affirmed of the Romish traditions let them therefore goe arme in arme together since they will needes haue it so â—â— ioynt enemies to Christian Religion 18. Againe the Iewes ascribe so much credit and faith to their Cachamim or illumined Doctors that whatsoeuer they teach be it right or wrong they must not enquire into the truth thereof but receiue it as an article of their Creed and build their faith and saluation thereupon Thus writeth one of their owne Rabbines to wit Rabbi Isaac that died in Portugall Anno 1493. Wee are bound saith he to giue no lesse credit to euery Rabbine in their sermons and mysticall or allegoricall explications then vnto the Law of Moses it selfe and if there be found in their words any thing hyperbolicall or contrary to nature and sence we must ascribe the fault thereof to our owne defectiue vnderstanding and not vnto their words And the same is the doctrine of their Thalmud Their speeches saith it are the speeches of the liuing God neither doth one word of theirs fall to the ground in vaine and therefore we are bound to beleeue all things whatsoeuer are written of them or in their name for it is the truth neither must any man laugh at them neither in his countenance nor in his heart for whosoeuer shall doe so shall not escape punishment and his punishment they say shall be this that he shall be tormented in hell in boyling excrements And in another Booke the Iewes are commanded to say Amen not onely to their Prayers but also to all their Sermons and alleÌ„goricall expositions Yea if two Rabbines contend and contradict each other yet they are bound to beleeue both of them because the words both of the one and the other are the words of the liuing God though they vnderstand not each other And in a word so great is their madnesse that they are not ashamed to say That the words of their Rabbines are more to be regarded then the words of Moses law and that if they teach that the right hand is the left and the left the right yet they are bound to beleeue them 19. And is not the Church of Rome paralell to them in this case I will not condemne them but let their owne words be their Iudges Thus write the Rhemists in their Annotations vpon Acts 17. 11. The hearers must not try and iudge whether their Teachers doctrine be true or no neither may they reiect that which they find not in Scripture The same is the tenent of Cardinall Hosius Andradius and all other of that stampe Bellarmine affirmeth that the people must beleeue what soeuer their Passors teach except they broach somenew doctrine which hath not beene heard of in the Church before and if they do so yet they must not Iudge of them but referre them to the definitiue sentence of the Pope to the which they must yeeld full consent without further examination Yea he impudently concludeth in another place That if their ordinary Pastor teach falshood another that is not their Pastor teach the contrary truth yet the people ought to follow their Pastor erring rather then the other telling the truth And another blasphemous Cardinall giueth a reason thereof Because saith he if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and man and the Pope thought the same hee should not be condeÌ„ned For saith a third Cardinal the iudgement of the Pope is the iudgement of God and his sentence the sentence of God As if the Iudgement and sentence of God could bee erronious which the first Cardinall supposeth concerning the Pope or as if the Popes sentence being erronious could be the sentence of God as the second affirmeth Obserue their blasphemous absurdities Siluester Prierias concludeth this poynt when hee sayth That whosoeuer resteth not on the doctrine of the Romane Church and Bishop of Rome as the infallible rule of God is an Heretike And the Canonists sticke not to say that the Pope is subiect to no law but that his iudgement is in stead of law and that his actions are not to bee enquired into neither may a man say vnto him though hee lead thousand soules into hell with him Sir why doe you thus and that it is not better then sacriledge to call in question the Popes fact or to iudge of his actions Thus an insallibility of iudgement and an impossibility of erring is ascribed vnto the Bishop of Rome so that whatsoeuer hee propoundeth bee it right or wrong must bee receiued vpon paine of damnation Neither is it ascribed onely vnto him the worlds high Priest but also to their Councills and inferiour Pastors animated by his spirit whose doctrine is to be heard and not examined as they teach And therefore it is esteemed a great sin amongst them for a man to make question of any doctrine brought vnto them by any Romish Iesuite Fryer or Priest
Asse and the holy Spirit lesse able to make that speake then an Angell was to make an Asse to speake Then which what could be brayed out more like the beast he speaketh of 26. But some may say All these are but priuate mens opinions we heare not all this while the determination of the Church Let vs harken therefore to the voyce of the Church touching this poynt that is as they hold of the Councill or rather Conuenticle of Romish Bishops assembled together at Trent which they call the Church representatiue The second Canon of the second decree in thy fourth Session of that Councill doth thus determine Let no man trusting to his owne wisedome dare to interpret the Scripture after his owne priuate sense or contrary to that sense which our holy Mother the Church holdeth or contrary to the vnanimous consent of the Fathers The former part of this Canon is good and sound for Saint Peter saith that no Scripture is of priuate interpretation and therefore they which wrest the Scriptures to their owne senses contrary to the intent and scope of them are guilty of a grieuous sinne before God and doe it to their owne destruction for Optimus scripturae lector est qui dictorum intellectum non attulerit sed retulerit exscriptura saith Hil. that is He is the best reader of the Scripture which doth not bring a sense to the Scripture but draweth it out of the Scripture Besides the middle and end of the Canon is not to bee misliked if they haue a fauourable interpretation for the iudgement of the Fathers is greatly to be regarded and the authority of the Church is to be held in especiall reuerence but for all this latet anguis in herba vnder these faire pretences of words is couched a snake of foule errour for first they tye the gift of interpretation of Scripture and of decision of controuersies to the Chaire of Peter seated at Rome and possessed by the Pope Peters successour as they call him or to the Chaire of Bishops assembled together in a Councill as in Noahs Arke whereas Saint Paul saith plainely speaking of the gift of interpretation These things workethone and the same Spirit distributing to euery man seuerally as he will And in another place that the spirituall man discerneth all things and therefore the Scriptures Now by the spirituall man the Apostle meaneth the man regenerate and sanctified by the Spirit as it appeareth by that he opposeth him to the naturall man in the verse going before and so the gift of discerning and interpreting is not proper to the Chaire of Bishops 27. Secondly this Canon doth not onely giue vnto the Church thus conceiued of them the onely gift of interpretation but also a Praetorian and vnexaminable authority in interpreting so that all which they deliuer out of their Chaires must bee receiued peremptorily without examining the grounds and reasons for which they are mooued to be of that iudgement which Tyrannicall vsurpation is both contrary to the expresse precepts and principles of holy Scripture and also to the doctrine and practice of all the ancient Fathers for the scripture bids to try all things to hold that which is good And Paul refused not to haue his doctrine examined of the men of Berâ—a by the Scripture the same Apost directeth vs how to behaue our selues at the time of prophecying namely that two or three Prophets speake the other iudge All which places are flatopposite to that peremptory obtruding of interpretations vpon the Church which the Canon speaketh of so are all the Fathers in generall for in prescribing certaine rules to all men both of vnderstanding and interpreting the Scriptures they plainely shew that there is not this absolute authority nor infallibility in any to obtrude what interpretation soeuer without contradiction or examination 28. Lastly the Canon in giuing this indefinite power of interpretation and determination of doubts to the Church without any relation had to the Scripture doth vtterly iustle out the Scripture from being the Iudge And so Andradius the interpretour of this Councill doth expound the intendment thereof when he saith that the iudgement of the Church is Principium vltra quod non sit fas in inquisitione progredi Aprinciple beyond the which it is not lawfull to proceede in inquisition By which he giueth to vnderstand that our faith must relye wholly and solely vpon the iudgement of the Church that is the Pope and his Prelates without enquirie at all into the word of God whether that which they propound be consonant to the truth or no. As Erasmus in a certaine disputation against the Papists confesseth that their opinion hath not sure certain testimonies of Scripture but that the contrary opinion may be better more clerely strongly proued out of Gods word notwithstanding saith he if the Church bid I will beleeue it for I will captiuate my vnderstanding to the obedience of the Church And this indeed is the Babylonian seruitude of the church of Rome wherby they fetter the souls of their followers to perpetual slauery and lead theÌ„ blindfold vnder the veile of an implicite faith vnto perdition for this is the first ground they lay in the hearts of all their generation that they must not examine the doctrine of the Church but take it at their hands as good coyne though it be neuer so counterfeit doctrina in Concilijs definit a custodieÌ„da est non examinanda saith Bellarmine that doctrine which is defined in a Council is to be kept not examined and ordinarius pastor Ecclesiae audiendus est non iudicandus saith Stapleton an ordinary Pastor of the Church is to be heard not iudged thus we see that the Scripture is thrust cleane out of dores from hauing any right or title in the decision of questions of faith not onely by priuate men but euen by their Church it selfe 29. Now here two things are to be obserued of vs for the plainer enucleation and clearing of this poynt first that in making the Scripture Iudge we doe not exclude the Church nor any member of the Church from the office of iudging and discerning onely we place them in their due order and ranke for this is it we intend that the Scripture is the highest and most absolute Iudge from the sentence whereof there is no appeale to be made to any higher Court and that the iudgement determination of the Church or of any member therof is subordinate vnto that and to be ruled and guided by that and where it is agreeable vnto that there to be receiued where it swarueth from that to be reiected For as in the ciuill estate the Iudges deputed to that office haue no absolute authority in themselues but are subiect vnto the lawe and the Ministers thereof and therefore must not speake what they list but what the law directeth so in the state Ecclesiasticall they
that are inferiour Iudges are but the Ministers of the law of God and must not vary from the rule thereof in any respect And for this cause as the Iewes were commanded to obey the sentence and determination of the Priest in all controuersies so the Priest was commanded to giue iudgement according to the law and no otherwise and albeit the Hebrew glosse vpon that Text teacheth that if the Priest say that the right hand is the left or the left is the right his sentence is to be holden which is the plaine doctrine of the Church of Rome Iudaizing in this as in many other things yet Lyra writing vpon that Text saith that the glosse is manifestly false because the sentence of no man of what authority soeuer is to be holden if it be contrary to the law of God so we admit the Church to be Iudge and euery priuate Christian also in his place but we ascribe the chiefe power and authority of Iudging to the Scripture alone The next place we allow vnto the Church and the lowest vnto the particular members thereof These last to be directed by the Church but yet so farre as it bringeth it authority out of the Scriptures and it to be limited by the bounds of the Scripture also and if it iudge against the euidence thereof not to bee heard nor beleeued This is our opinion that wee may not be mistaken but our aduersaries aduance their Church vnto the highest place and make the Scripture an inferiour vassall and seruant vnto it as I haue declared 30. Secondly note thereason that moueth them thus to disclaime from the iudgement of the Scripture it is because they know full well that the maynest and chiefest poynts of their Religion wherein they dissent from vs haue no ground nor foundation in the Scripture but would vanish like a morning aust if the light of Gods word should but shine vpon them as for instance their doctrines of worshipping Images of tasting dayes of prayer for the dead of Purgatorie of shrift of pardons of the communion in one kinde of single life and of the priuate Masse and such like all which poynts and many other their owne Writers contesse cannot be sufficiently proued out of the Scripture And therefore Andradius doth fully and ingenuously acknowledge that many poynts of their Religion would reele and stagger if they were not supported by tradition and Bellarmine himselfe saith that it may be doubted whether the great poynt of transubstantiation may be sufficiently enforced out of the words of the Text Hoc est corpus meum So that wee see now the reason why they will not be tried by the Scriptures euen this because if the Scripture bee Iudge Popery must needes goe to wracke This is ther fore a cunning and witty policie or rather a grosse and palpable subtilty of theirs whereby though they dazle the sight of the simple and ignorant yet they cannot bleare the eyes of the vnderstanding and wise from discerning into their fraud 31. Hauing thus proued that they reiect the Scripture now I come to shew that they allow of no other Iudges but themselues for the proofe whereof there needes no long discourse seeing it is sufficiently apparent by that which hath already beene deliuered that they appeale from the sentence of the Scripture vnto the iudgement of the Church and tye vnto the girdle thereof the onely key of interpretation Now by the Church they intend first the Romish Synagogue that is all that whole bony which dependeth vpon the Pope for their head and receiue as it were life and nourishment by his influence for as Bristo saith the Romane Church is the Catholike Church and as the Rhemists the Catholike and the Roman faith is all one Secondly by the Church they meane more particularly a congregation of Romish Bishops and Prelates assembled together in a Councill which they call the Church representatiue And thirdly and principally they intend by the Church the Pope who is the head of the Church and contayneth in him virtually all the power and authority of the Church The Church in the first sense is not to be this Iudge say they nor yet in the second which notwithstanding is but an vpstart opinion and but of the first head for in the Councils of Constance and Basil it was decreed that the Pope should obey the Councill and be ordered by it in all things pertayning to faith and the reformation of the 〈…〉 and many learned Romanists haue been of the same opinion as Bellarmine confesseth but now neither may the Councill be Iudge therefore take the Church in the third sense for the Pope and then you haue the man that is the Church virtuall and must be all in all euen the only Iudge and Vmpier in all controuersies The center in which all the lines that is opinions of Fathers Councils and Diuines must concurre and meete The Epitome and abridgement of the whole Church in whom alone remayneth the whole power of the Catholike Church And thus from the Scripture they call vs to the Church from the Church to the Councils and from them to the Pope and there they pitch their line as in the highest poynt of resolution 32. That they thus vnderstand by the Church the Pope and that all iudgement is deuolued vnto him alone heare them speake in their owne persons Bellarmine saith that the Pope without a Councill may define matters of faith because being the vniuersall Pastor and Teacher of the Church he cannot erre teaching out of the chaire and that he is absolutely aboue the Councill and that he may as he is the chiefe Prince of the Church retract the iudgement of the Councill and not follow the greater part And therefore when hee affirmeth in another place that the Pope with a Councill is the Iudge of the true sense of the Scripture he foysteth in the word Councill for a flourish but indeede hee meaneth the Pope alone for if the Pope be aboue all Councils and may establish or disanull their decrees at his pleasure then is not hee with a Councill but without a Councill the chiefe Iudge 33. Gregory of Valence is more plaine By the Church saith he we meane her head that is to say the Romane Bishop in whom resideth the full authority of the Church the Iesuite Coster after he hath discarded the Scripture from being Iudge because it is Res sine anima sensu in varias pugnantesque sent entias distracta A thing without life and sense distracted into diuers and contrary opinions saith that Penes Ecclesiā Cathelicā est indicium veritatis The iudgement of the truth is belonging to the Catholike Church but because the whole Church cannot meete together in one place without great inconueniences Therefore God hath appoynted and nominated one man to wit the Pope to whom he hath so tyed his presence and spirituall grace that in question◠of
for to restraine a common good to a particular vse is an open wrong to the good it selfe which the more common it is the better it is and the lesse common the lesse good for bonum est sui diffusiuum good inclineth naturally to spreade it selfe and therfore the restriction thereof is violence and force offered to the nature of it and truth cannot abide to bee imprisoned but loueth liberty This is true in all naturall good and true things but much more in this supernaturall good and truth which as Origenâ— well noteth was not written for a few as Platoes Bookes were but for the people and multitude yea for the veriest Ideots and women and children as the Fathers affirme 20. And yet these presumptuous Romanists forbid the reading of the Scripture among the people one of them affirming That it was the deuils inuention to permit the people to reade the Bible Another That he knew certaine men to be possessed of the deuill because being but Husband-men they were able to discourse of the Scriptures All teaching that it is the ground of Heresie and that Lay men are no better then Hogs and Dogs and therefore these precious pearles not to be committed vnto them and that the Scripture to a Lay man is as a sword in a mad mans or a knife in a Childes hand Thus they practise to imprison the Scriptures within the Priests cells or Monkes cloysters which were giuen by God to be the light of the world and yet which is to be noted in Queene Maries bloudy and blinde daies such as could dispend a certaine summe of mony by the yeare might reade the Bible without any speciall dispensation as if heresie builded her nest rather in the brest of the poore man then of the rich or as if the rich were lesse carnall then the poore and thus these saucy fellowes handle the sacred Scripture at their pleasure being rightly to be branded with the name of Heretikes whom Epiphanius generally calleth Lucifugae because they cannot abide the light of the Scriptures but fly from them as Owles and Bats from the light 21. Another practice of theirs is against the sense of the Scripture as the two former were against the letter that neither the body nor the soule thereof might be left vnuiolated and this is in respect of the learned to bar them vp from controuling their errours as the other were in respect of the simple to keepe them from once looking into them Their policy in this is to interdict all senses and expositions of the Scripture saue such as agree with the Church of Rome and are allowed by the Pope of Rome this is the interdiction of the Councill of â—rent and is grounded vpon a false interpretation of that article of our faith I beleeue the Catholike Church for as Stapleton saith The literall sense of that article is that thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth And Cardinall Hosius If any man haue the interpretation of the Church of Rome though he know not whether and how it agreeth with the words of the scripture notwithstanding he hath Ipsissimum verbum Dei Now by the Catholike Church they meane the Romane Church or rather the Romane Bishop as I haue shewed for as Siluester sayth The power of the Catholike Church remaineth onely in him And as Stapleton The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching and therfore one â—aith that the Pope may change â—he Gospell and giue to it according to place and time another sense Yea a blasphemous Cardiâ—all is bâ—ld to say That if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and Man and the Pâ—pe thought the same he should not be condemned This is a tricke pâ—ssing all other whereby they not onely make sure worke with the Scripture that it neuer doe them hurt but also fashion the sacred and diuine sense thereof vnto their fond and foolish fancies and make it speake not what the Holy Ghost intendeth but what they imagine Nay they are so impudent as to say That the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood the sense thereof being one while this and another while that according as it pleaseth the Church to change her iudgement Can there be a greater disgrace to the Scripture then this is 22. Adde to these yet another deuice which is far worse then all the rest that is a grosse and palpable wringing and wresting out of the holy Scripture a sense contrary to the true intendment of the place fitting it strangely to their own purpose This is a practice of theirs so coÌ„mon as that their Books swarme with nothing so much as such fond and foolish interpretations and so ridiculous withall that it would make euen Heraclitus himselfe to laugh if he were aliue I wil here report some few of these strange wrested Expositions that the Reader may haue a taste of them and so iudge of the whole caske 23. And to beginne at the beginning of the Bible Genes 1. 16. It is written God created two great Lights the greater to rule the day and the lesser to rule the night that is saith Innocentius the third one of their owne Popes And also Molina the Iesuite God ordained in the Firmament of the Catholike Church two dignities to wit the Pontificiall dignitie and the Regall But that to gouerne the day that is the Spiritualty and is the greater and this to rule the night that is the Carnalty and is the lesser so that how great difference is betwixt the Sunne and the Moone so great is there betwixt the Bishop of Rome and a King that is according to the Glosse vpon the same place seuen and fiftie times So in the 3. of Genesis whereas the words of the Text are plaine Hee shall breake thy head or tread vpon thy head which is the first and principall promise of the Messiah they contrary both to the Hebrew and Septuagint translate and expound it Ipsa She shall applying vnto the Virgin Mary that which properly belongeth vnto Christ euen the worke of our Redemption And this interpretation and translation of that place is approued by the Councill of Trent in approuing the vulgar Latine Bible for authenticall and by Bellarmine also who calleth it a great mysterie that in the Hebrew a verbe of the Masculine gender is ioyned with a Nowne of the foeminine to signifie that a woman should breake the serpents head but not by her selfe but by her sonne and is also so translated by our Doway Translatours in English 24. So againe that place in the Psalme Psal 91. 13. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and the Cockatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon Pope Alexander the third interpreted it of himselfe and the Emperour applying the promise made to Christ principally and in him to all the Elect vnto himselfe as Pope and
the Elders of Ephesus I haue deliuered vnto you the whole counsaile of God Now if hee deliuered to them the whole counsaile of God then no part of his counsaile that concerned the mysterie of Christian Religion was vndeliuered Besides it is as certaine that that Church which next succeeded the Apostles was the most pure and absolute Church whether for doctrine or manners matter or forme that euer was in the world and therefore to degenerate from that must needes be to degenerate from the puritie and sanctity of Religion And againe it cannot bee denyed that though some heresies were broached euen in the Apostles times and were coetaneae Apostolorum as Tertullian noteth and though the primitiue age of the Church after the Apostles was most pestered with Heretikes yet euermore the truth preuailed both in regard of birthright and predominance And therefore they that will plead antiquitie must both prescribe from the Apostles time and must haue a good title also to hold by for these two things are necessarily required to a iust prescription as the Lawyers speake Bonus titulus A good title and Legittimum tempus A lawfull time A good title is that which is warranted by the diuine Law and a lawfull time is that which is fetcht from Christ Iesus and his Apostles both these concurring together are an inuincible argument of the truth The first proposition therefore must needes be infallibly true 3. And so I leaue it and come to the second proposition the truth whereof shall bee manifested in two poynts first in respect of the outward face and fashion of their Church and secondly in respect of the principall doctrines which are proper vnto them as they are the Romish Synagogue 3. For the first The outward face of the Church deuideth it selfe into three branches first into the persons that exercise preeminence and authoritie in it and secondly into the iurisdiction and authoritie exercised by those persons and thirdly into the outward ceremonies thereof In all these the Church of Rome is degenerate from the Primitiue and Apostolicall puritie 4. The principall persons of the Romish Hierarchie are these The Pope first as the ring-leader next the Cardinals his Counsellors of state then Archbishops and Bishops his assistants and lastly the shaueling Priests his vassals to which body may be added as excrements an infinite rabble of religious Orders as Monks Fryers and Heâ—mits with such like and of Fryers the Dominicanes the Franciscanes the Austinians the Ambrosians the Minorites the Gilbertines the Crossebearers the Cisterensians the Blacke the White the Gray the Bare-footed the Begging with a number more and to conclude the Iesuites which as they are the taile of all the rest for the time so they are the head of all the rest for vill nous conspiracies bloudy plots diuelâ—ish deuices and hellish practices Now of all thesâ— Bishops onely excepted wee finde not so much as any mention neither in the writing of the Apostles nor in the age next succeeding after them for though the name Pope Papa being a word of the Syracusan Language and signifying as much as Pater Father be of great antiquitie yet as a Iesuite of their owne confesseth with others it was a common name to all Bishops as appeareth both in Cyprian and Ruffinus till Gregory the seuenth in an assembly held at Rome decreed that onely the Bishops of Rome should bee called Popes But as touching Cardinals the matter is more grosse for the first birth and originall of that name can be deriued no higher then eyther from Gregory the firsts time or Pope Siluester or Marcellus or Pontianus by their owne confession and therefore some of them ingenuously acknowledge that the Order of Cardinals is not ex iure diuino by Gods ordinance though others no lesse foolishly then impudently would fixe their foundation vpon these words of the Scripture Domini sunt Cardines terrae The hinges or the pillars of the earth are the Lords Therefore Cardinals are of God which is as good a consequent as his that would prooue that Heretikes ought to be put to death by Scripture because Saint Paul said Haereticum hominem deuita c. as hath beene shewed before As for the name of Bishops wee deny not but it is found in Scripture and so Archbishop may also be warranted by the same authositie as signifying nothing else but a chiefe Bishop but how farre the Romish Archbishops and Bishops are degenerate from their office described by the Scripture all the world can witnesse for the Scripture Bishops were diligent Preachers these are idle Prelates they were persecuted these are persecutors they were humble persons these are proud Princes they were holy men seeking onely the aduancement of the Kingdome of Christ these are profane worldlings seeking their owne gaine and pompe and carnall honours all this is confessed of them and lamented by Espensaeus one of the same ranke who thus writeth It was no lesse a wonder in olde times saith he to be called a Bishop and not to preach then he is now as rare as a monster who is seen to performe that dutie and againe I know saith he some learned Bishops who standing vpon their Gentilitie forsooth and greatnesse hold it a matter of seruitude and basenesse to be exercised in preaching because their predecessors were not accustomed thereunto 5. As touching Priests in the new Testament phrase all Christians are called Priests and they whose office it is to dispose the mysteries of the Gospell Ministers and Elders and Pastors but now none may haue that name but their anoynted Shauelings who as they say create their Creator by fiue coniuring words and offer him vp vpon the altar as a Sacrifice propitiatorie for the quicke and the dead For albeit the word Priest is deriued from presbyter which signifieth an Elder and in that sense might well be giuen to the Ministers of the new Testament yet because it is in common vse of speech taken for one appointed to sacrifice which in Latine is Sacerdos and in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And because the Ministers of the Gospell are not once named by these termes in the new Testament therefore they that in this signification terme the Ministers of the Gospell by the name of Priests degenerate from the true meaning of the Scripture but what should I speake of the name seeing the office of these Shauelings is so contrarie to that function which was practised by the Apostles and Disciples of Iesus Christ for the Apostles are neuer said to sacrifice Christ on the Altar as these Shauelings are pretended to doe Their office was to minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not to sacrifice they receiued of the Lord and gaue vnto the people but these create a Sacrifice of themselues and then offer it vp to the Lord. Here then is a plaine declining of the Romish Priests from the true Ministers of the Primitiue Church both in name and office
vncertaintie of vnwritten traditions for the Scripture was euer the same since it was Scripture and so shall continue to the end of the World no man daring to alter or change it to adde thereto or detract ought therfrom for feare of the curse denounced against such presumption But Traditions are and haue beene euer most variable and vnconstant some that haue beene held for Apostolical traditions being vtterly abrogated and abolished as threefold immersion or thrice dipping in baptisme for signification of the Trinitie giuing the Eucharist to infants which was vsed 600. yeeres in the Church standing in publike Prayers at Easter and Pentecost and such like and some altered and changed as deferring Baptisme vntill the feasts of Easter and Pentecost into baptizing vpon any occasion fasting vpon Wednesdayes and Saturdayes into Wednesdayes and Fridayes and so many ancient constitutions dispensed withall by the pretended Apostolicall authoritie of the Church of Rome as is confessed by them And that this is an vncontroulable truth that one famous example of the contention betwixt the East and West Churches touching the obseruation of Easter doth euince for the one side pretended a tradition from Saint Iohn and Saint Philip the other from Saint Peter and Saint Paul Now if some traditions bee thus vncertaine subiect to change abrogating dispensing and abolishing all must needs bee of the same nature and if all bee of that nature then there can be no securitie in conscience to suspend our faith vpon them the safest way therefore is to relye vpon Scripture alone the fulnesse whereof Tertullian adored and of the authoritie whereof whatsoeuer was destitute Ierome iudged to bee nothing but vaine babbling and besides the which whosoeuer teacheth any doctrine of faith Saint Augustine pronounceth anathema against him 27. Thirdly and lastly by the infallible truth which shineth in the Scriptures as the Sunne in the firmament wherein no errour euer was found no spots or blemishes as in the Moone of traditions no deceit nor misleading vnlesse in sence peruerted as by Heretikes to their owne destruction but many traditions haue beene as erronious and deceitfull in themselues so the causes of much errour in the Church witnesse Papius who as Eusebius testifieth broched many exorbitant doctrines vnder pretence of tradition from the Apostles and drew manie Ecclesiasticall Doctours moued by his antiquitie for he was Disciple to Iohn into the errour of the Chiliasts and all the ancient Heretikes almost who flying from the Scriptures did shelter themselues vnder the pretext eyther of philosophicall principles fained gospels or forged traditions and hereof many ancient traditions themselues giue pregnant euidence as those alleadged by Clemens Alexandrinus to wit Iustification by philosophie Repentance after death Preaching the Gospell to the wicked in hell which the Romanists themselues condemne or that of Cyprian touching anointing to bee vsed in Baptisme and mixing wine with water which Saint Augustine relected as erronious or that of Iraeneus who saith that it was a tradition that Christ suffered at fiftie yeeres of age which is disallowed by all sound authoritie and conuinced of errour by the Scripture it selfe Of this kind a number more might bee produced if need required but these are enough to inferre the conclusion that traditions are not of that infallible truth as the holy Scripture is but rather subiect to errour and falshood and therefore it can bee no part of Christian wisedome to repose our faith vpon them for it is to build vpon a sandie foundation which will deceiue the building in time of need 28. Auricular confession hath as little securitie in the practice of it as any of the former doctrines for first it implieth inpossibilitie of performance by requiring a perfect enumeration of all particular sinnes both secret and open and that vpon danger of damnation the absolution being frustrate if this condition bee not obserued Now because no man is able to performe this therefore no mans conscience can be assured of the remission of his sinnes by that sacramentall medicine whereas on the contrarie hee that confesseth his knowne sinnes to God and forsaketh them with a generall detestation of all other vnknowne though many escape his remembrance yet by Gods promise is sure to find mercie which is the doctrine of the Protestants This is possible and easie to be done The other impossible and improbable and that many learned of their side haue ingeniously confessed as Cassander Rhenanus with diuers others And albeit the Fathers of the Trent Councell in shew seemed to qualifie the matter with this limitation that other sinnes which do not come into the mind of the partie confessing diligently thinking vpon them are vnderstood as generally included in his confession yet the Iesuite Suarez confesseth that the Priest cannot remit any one sinne except the penitent confesse all that hee ought to confesse and Maldonate another Iesuite that because the Priest can remit no sinnes but such as he heareth confessed therefore hee that must remit all must heare all And it is plaine that whatsoeuer the Councell spake yet it meant no otherwise by the reason which they giue for necessitie of confession which is that the penitent may bee iudged whether he hath sinned or no and if hee haue in what kind and degree to the end that proportionable penance may be ioyned to his offence and therefore it is required that not onely the act of sinne but all the circumstances bee discouered Who what to what end how by what helpes where when which are the seuen circūstances attending vpon euery actiō Now how can the Priest iudge of the nature qualitie quantitie of the sin except he know it with all the circumstances if he know it not how can he enioyne a competent satisfaction And if no satisfaction be enioyned then no remission eyther of the sinne or at least releasement from the temporall punishment thereof can bee obtained What a snare are mens consciences brought into by this intricate doctrine How much freer and securer a course is it to confesse necessarily to God alone voluntarily to the Pastor in cases of distresse of conscience and want of instruction and penally to the Church in publike for satisfaction not of God but of men for some publike offence committed This is the doctrine of Protestants which as it is free from impossibilitie so it is full of safetie 29. Secondly their doctrine leaueth the conscience in doubt whether the sinne bee truly pardoned or no by the absolution of the Priest for the Priest being a man is vnable to search into the heart of a sinner and so consequently may erre in the vse of the key for if the Confessor bee an Hypocrite though he make a true relation of all his sinnes with all their circumstances and be therefore absolued by the Priest yet it is certaine that such an one is not absolued in Heauen but stands lyable to Gods
faith he doth neuer erre Gretzer saith that the generall lawfull and ordinarie Iudge of controuersies is the Bishop of Rome whether hee define any thing alone or with a Generall Councill this Iudge is always infallible Staplet on saith that the foundation of our Religion is placed of necessitie vpon the authority of this manâ— teaching in whom wee heare God himselfe speaking And another of them saith Si toâ—us mundus sententiaret contra Papam If the whole world should determine against the Pope yet we must stand to his sentence To conclude the Canon Law saith that it were heresie to thinke that our Lord God the Pope might not decree as hee doth yea that his rescripts and decretall Epistles are not Canonicall Scripture 34. Thus we see the Pope is that which they meane by the Church and he is the onely compendious Iudge and therefore when they talke of the Church it is but a vayne vaunt for when all comes to all they entend nothing by the Church but their Lord God the Pope as the Canonists call him who is ens secundae intentionis compofitum ex Deo homine Abeing of the second intention compounded of God and man and quasi Deus in terris c. as it were a God vpon earth greater then man and lesse then God hauing the fulnesse of power Now by this that hath beene said the truth of my second proposition doth euidently appeare to wit that the Romanists will allow no other Iudges in matter of controuersie but themselues alone and so giue iust cause to all that are not blinded with errour at least to suspect their Religion if not vtterly to abandon it which is the conclusion necessarily following vpon these premises 35. Which that it is of most necessarie consequence appeareth by this because it is against all reason that the same should be both the party and the Iudge yea in equity is it fit that we should stand to his iudgement whom we accuse to be a falsifier of the Scripture and euen Antichrist himselfe or that that Church should bee our Church which wee affirme and proue to be an Apostate and an harlot seeing that a Iudge should be indifferent and vnpartiall and not a party as the Church and Pope of Rome is in all cases of controuersie depending betwixt them and vs as for example in the controuersie of the Church the question being which is the true Church The Iudge to determine thereof we say is the Scripture they cry The Church meaning their owne Church as I haue shewed Doe they not by their doctrine aduance themselues into the tribunall seate and make their Church the Iudge whether it bee the Church or no so in the question touching the Popes Supremacy who shall be Iudge whether this supreme power be in the Pope or no Mary the Pope himselfe for they admit no other Iudge Sure he must needes gaine the cause when hee is thus his owne Iudge If this bee not a plaine tergâ—ueâ—sâ—tion I know not what is if this doth not bewray the weakenesse of their cause let any indifferent man consider and giue sentence 36. For as on ourside in the question of the Kings Supremacie whether euery King in his owne dominion bee the supreme Gouernour of the Church vnder Christ or no if wee should in this case admit no Iudge but the King himselfe Or in the question of our Church whether wee be the true Church of Christ or no if wee should refuse all other triall saue that which ariseth from the iudgement of our owne Church and the Bishops and Prelates thereof would not all men laugh at our folly and thinke our cause weake and desperate So may all men thinke of the Romish Religion that it be wrayeth manifest folly in the maintayners and apparent weakenesse in the grounds thereof in that it will not bee iudged but by itselfe especially seeing it is the property of selfe-loue whereof no man liuing is freed to make men blinde in their owne causes and partiall on their owne sides To conclude therefore as the Lion in Esope that challenged to himselfe the whole prey that was caught and would not stand to the equall partition of his fellow-hunters proued himselfe thereby to be a tyrant and his title naught so the Pope of Rome and his Proctours in refusing to be iudged by any saue themselues and by that right clayming a title to the truth discouereth both his tyrannie ouer the Church of God and the holy Scriptures and the badnesse of his weake cause seeing truth like a chaste matrone though it be slandered yet is so bold and powerfull that it feareth not to bee tried by those that are the greatest enemies thereof Spectatum admissirisum teneatis amici MOTIVE VI. That Religion doth iustly deserue to bee suspected which doth purposely disgrace the sacred Scriptures But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. OVr Aduersaries may fitly be likened to churlish and angrie Mastifes whose property it is to rend with their teeth those that are vnarmed and not able to resist but if they meet with an armed man that can keepe them off and entertaine them with sharpe blowes then they wreak all their teene vpon the cudgell or weapon wherewith they are annoyed so they seeing themselues well banged and beaten by our men at Armes I meane our Champions that defend the quarrell of our Church with the staffe of the Scripture and their hairy scalpes wounded with the stones fetcht out of Dauids scrip fall a snarling and biting the staffe and the stones which haue beene the instruments of their sorrow whereas if they finde any without a staffe in his hand or a stone in his sling that is vnfurnished with Scripture to fight with them ouer him they domineere take him captiue and leade him to their denne for a prey This their malice against the sacred Scripture which is the only engine of their destruction I hope by Gods fauourable assistance so to discouer in this Chapter that they themselues shall euer bee reputed as blasphemers of the truth and their religion as odious and abominable to all posterity 2. The Maior or first proposition in this demonstration though it bee of an vndoubted truth yet for the greater illustratio thereof two poynts are to be considered first what this Scripture is which is opposed against and secondly what they are to be esteemed which oppose themselues vnto the Scripture The Scripture contained in the Olde and new Testament is in a word the holy and sacred word of the eternall God which to haue said of it is an ascription of the greatest dignitie vnto it as can bee deuised for if it bee the holy and sacred word of the eternall God then must it needs be perfect excellent pure vpright cleane permanent wife sweet and what else may be spoken for the setting forth of the excellency of a thing all which attributes are giuen
at Saint Mary Maior and a third at Treuers the Cup wherein Iohn the Euangelist drunke the poyson after he was condemned by Domitian is both at Bononia and at Rome to be seene Saint Anne hath three bodies one at Apla another at Prouince and a third at Lyons and so her head is in three places at Treuers at Turen and at Thuring Lazarus the Brother of Marie is like wise a Gyant of three bodies one of them is at Massilia another at Angustodune and the third at Auelona 38. Iâ— would fill a volume if I should reckon vp all their strange relicks Let him that desireth to see more of them reade Caluins Tractate called Admonitio de Reliquijs where he shall finde a whole thraue of them I for this time end with three or foure braue ones for the nonce which are worthy neuer to be forgotten It is written of Dunstane the Abbot of Glastenbury that as he was hallowing a certaine Church he beheld the right thumbe of Editha then Abbesse of Wilton as shee was crossing and blessing her forhead and much delighting therein hee tooke it into his hand and said Neuer might this thumbe perish By vertue of which prayer of his after Edithaes death when all her body was turned into ashes that thumbe and another part of her body which it seemeth he had blessed too were found safe and sound and so became Reliques We read also of a certaine Monke who gaue out that he had brought from the East some of the sound of the Bels which hung in Salomons Temple and that he could shew among other Reliques some of the haires which fell from the Seraphicall Angell when hee came to imprint the fiue wounds of Christ in S. Frauncis body Yea some of them are not ashamed to shew to the Pilgrimes that goe to Ierusalem a three cornerd stone which they beare them in hand is that very stone whereof Dauid spake saying The stone which the builders refused is the head of the corner Lastly at Cour cheuerin neere vnto Blois is kept for a monument the breath of S. Ioseph which he breathed when he claue wood being a Carpenter at Burgos in Spaine is shewne a Crucifix whose nailes and beard are cut euery moneth they grow so fast and in these excrements they say is great vertue At Rome is to bee seene the fore-skinne of our Sauiour which was cut off at his circumcision and in Galicia as Pilgrimes report are preserued some of the feathers of certaine chickens which are of the race of that Cocke which crowed when Peter denied his Master And at S. Denis is to bee seene the Lanthorne which Iudas caried in his hand when he came to betray his Master with a number other such like These bee their goodly Reliques which they would haue men to worship with such great deuotion of all which or at least of most of them we may truly auouch that which Augustine saith of miracles that they are vel figmenta mendacium hominum vel portenta fallacium spirituum That they are nothing but mere impostures and coozening deuices either of diuels or of auaricious Priests Friers and Monkes to nouzle the people in superstition and to line their owne purses with crownes 39. The bare narration of them is sufficient to bewray their falshood but much more the Logicall contrariety and naturall repugnancie that is among them which all the wit of man is not able to reconcile And last of all their nouelty for most of these Reliques was neuer heard of in this world for three hundred yeeres aftâ—r Christ so that it may iustly be wondred where they lay hid all that while and by what meanes they were found out at last or how they could continue so long If they say they were discouered by diuine reuelation as the bodies of Geruasius and Protasius to S. Ambrose of Stephen and Nichodemus to one Luâ—â—anus and the head of Iohn Baptist to two Monkes and the bones of Abacuk and Michaeas to a certaine Bishop and the body of S. Barnabe with the Gospell of S. Mathew vpon his brest I answere that though all these were true yet they were not reuealed to that end that they should be worshipped neither yet did the God of truth euer by his testimony bolster out such notorious lyes as are found in the Romish Reliques We may confidently therefore conclude that most abominable Idolatry is committed in the Church of Rome by the worshipping at least of false Reliques whereof there is such a swarme for the greatest part of their Reliques being counterfait the greatest part of the worship which is done vnto them must needes be Idolatry 40. The Iesuites to this obiection of ours giue two answeres one is Bellarmines who flatly denieth the Reliques in Churches to be counterfait because none are receiued but by the authority of the Bishop of Rome And as for the multiplicity of bodies hee saith that the parts of them are often found in diuers places and by a figure of speech are called by the name of the whole But the Iesuites answere by his leaue is idle and friuolous for first all these fore-named false Reliques are not caried about by priuate men but found in their Churches and therefore if authorized by the Popes holinesse the more shame for him and the more certainty for vs that he can erre like a sinfull man euen sitting in his chaire of doctrine And secondly though it were true which he saith concerning the bodies of Saints yet it cannot hold in other things as in Iohn Baptists finger and his shooe and the nailes of Christs crosse and the Virgin Maries milke and such like Therefore Vasques the Iesuite hath deuised another answere and that is Though the Reliques be vncertaine and false yet if they bee worshipped it is no sinne but a good worke Because as it is not the sinne of Idolatry saith hee to worship a beame of light vnder which the diuell lurketh when a man taketh it for Christ so if a man worship a false Relique supposing it to bee some true part of a Saint Merito suae deuotionis non caret He wanteth not the merit of his deuotion But this answere is not onely friuolous but impious for by the same reason the Iewes should be cleared from sinne when they crucified Christ because S. Paul saith they did it through zeale though not according to knowledge Rom. 19. 2. and the Gentiles when they put Christians to death because our Sauiour saith that in so dâ—ing they thought they did God good seruice Iohn 16. 2. but they both sinned notwithstanding most grieuously And their owne rule is that ignorantia non excusat à toto sed à tanto that is ignorance doth not excuse the whole fault committed but onely lessens the guilt of it I conclude therefore that notwithstanding all that can be said yet in the worshipping of Reliques is committed manifest and detestable Idolatry 41.
That all the power of Emperours and Kings is subdeligate in respect of the power of the Pope And againe that all secular power is to be restrayned enlarged and executed at the commaundement of the Pope This is the assertion of that man who was authorised first to write by Pope Iohn the two and twentieth and after his Booke was set foorth by the priuiledge of Gregory the thirteenth So that here we haue two Popes maintayning this doctrine Clement the first was of the same minde who affirmeth that hee and the rest of the Popes had a soueraignity and superiority ouer the Empire and vpon that ground he dissanulled all the Sentences and Processes made by Henry the seuenth Emperour And so also was Boniface the eighth who in that famous Canon Vnam sanctam c. directly affirmeth that the Temporall authority must be subiect to the Spirituall and that it is necessary to saluation to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome Now the rest of the Popes must needes be of the same minde or else they should condemne these of error and that speaking definitiuely which is contrary to their Religion And so indeede that they are Bellarmine their Champion in his late Booke against Barclay the Lawyer doth manifestly declare who most impudently maintayneth this position with all his wit against that learned man as also in his last doting Apologie against our King wherein without doubt he is authorised and as it were tapped on the backe and called A good childe by the Popes Holinesse himselfe 72. Thus we see this doctrine maintayned by the Popes and their Lawes Let vs see also what the Cardinalls and the Iesuites say vnto it Cardinall Baronius a notable clawer of the Popes holdeth that the Pope hath power directly ouer Princes agreeing with Bozius and Triumphus but Cardinall Bellarmine with others on his side quallifieth the matter and saith that the Popes power ouer Princes in temporall matters is not direct but indirect as depending vpon his spirituall power and in order relation vnto that Let vs leaue these two Cardinalls fighting about direct indirect and come to the other Iesuites Gregory de Valentia saith that the Pope is subiect to none but that by a certaine hereditary right he is exempted from all humane jurisdiction Tollet affirmeth that there may bee in the Church many holier and learneder then the Pope but none superior or equall vnto him in dignitie Turrian the Iesuite saith that Christ hath translated all his Kingdome on earth vpon the Pope who beareth his person and carryeth his Image And lastly all of them like lines in a circle meeting in a Center ioyne in this that the Pope hath power to depose Kings to translate Kingdomes and to conferre them vpon others if it seeme to him necessary for the good of mens soules 73. Thus we haue their doctrine concerning their Head the Pope Now let vs heare what they say touching the body that hangs vpon his head their Clergie Kings are not now any more Soueraignes ouer Clerks faith Bellarmine and therefore Clerks are not bound to obey them by Gods law or mans except it be in respect of directiue lawes And Emanuel Sa. affirmeth that a Clergie man cannot be a Traytor though hee rebell because he is no subiect And it was long agoe the doctrine of the Fryers continued by the Iesuites that the King was not Lord ouer the Clergie but that the Pope was their Lord and therefore though a Clergie man had committed theft murther or treason yet hee ought not to bee called in question much lesse punished for it by a temporall Magistrate but ought to be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges in the Ecclesiasticall Court and if hee were conuict hee should lose his Orders and so being excluded from Office Benefice Ecclefiasticall if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King yea they goe so farre that if any offence were committed by diuers persons amongst whom there were one Clergie man none of the offenders were subiect to temporall iurisdiction And thus we see that neyther the Pope nor his Clergie will bee subiect to these higher Powers to which the Gospell commaundeth all men to submit themselues 74. How will they distinguish here Mary they haue two distinctions to helpe this doctrine out of the myre and yet all too weake First they say that when the Apostles Paul and Peter commanded euery soule to bee subiect c. they meane generally that all subiects should obey their superiors whether Spirituall or Temporall and not that euery one should particularly bee subiect to the King or secular power which interpretation is first flat contrary to the text for both Paul and Peter mention expressely Kings and Princes and such as haue the right of the sword which they would neuer haue done if Kings should haue beene subiect to Popes and not Popes to Kings for then they would haue instanced in Popes and not in Kings and though Christians were falsely accused of treason and rebellion to Princes yet this could not be a sufficient reason to mooue the Apostles to conceale so necessary a truth especially seeing they write to Christians and not to Infidels 75. Secondly it is contrary to reason for if Peter and so the Pope his pretended successor had beene in their iudgement superiors to Kings then surely Peter himselfe writing not onely to the people but also to the Elders of the Church as appeareth 1. Pet. 5. 1. would neuer haue enioyned them all to the obedience of the Ciuill Magistrate but would haue reserued some to his owne iurisdiction and bidden them all both Magistrate and people to submit themselues vnto him as the head of the Church or if he for modestie might forbeare this imperiall iniunction yet without question Paul had he beene of that minde would not haue sent euery soule to bee subiect to Kings but would haue told them that Kings and all should be subiect to Peter but seeing that neither of them both doth it neither here nor elsewhere and it is as they thinke so necessary a thing to be beleeued of all men it is most euident that they neuer meant it 76. Thirdly and lastly whereas the Apostle Paul commaundeth euery soule to be subiect wee may conclude that if the Pope be a soule or haue a soule for some of them haue thought that a man had no more a soule then a beast then he must be subiect And this conclusion a learned man that was afterward a Pope himselfe made when he plainly confessed that the Apostle did not except animam Papae the Popes soule from this subiection I omit heere S. Chrysostomes and Oecumenius exposition of the same place both which affirme that by euery soule the Apostle included both Priests Monks and Apostles and that this subiection was not contrary vnto piety And
errour 86. Secondly hee sayth that there are two kindes of Readers One that read with fruit and profit others that read without fruit yea rather with hurt Now the Scripture may bee read of the first but not of the second But I would know of him againe who hath that power to discerne betwixt these two Doe they know the heart of a man Or can they prophecy of that which is to come If they cannot doe these things then they ought not to locke vp the Scriptures from any vpon this surmise but permit the vse of that which is good to all and leaue the successe to God Againe because some peruert the Scripture to their damnation shall therefore all bee forbidden to reape comfort by it Because the theefe robs and kils with his sword shall not therefore an honest man vse one for his owne defence Because the Spider sucks vp poyson out of the flowre therefore shall not the Bee suck honey This is to take away the vse of all good things For as the Poet sayth Nil prodest quod non laedere possit idem Nothing so profitable in the vse but in the abuse may be hurtfull and nuisant 87. Lastly are the ignorant common people more subiect to erring and heresie then the learned Let Espensaeus a learned Bishop of their owne informe him to the contrary I remember sayth hee that an Italian Bishop told me that his countrey-men were scarred from reading the Scriptures lest they should become heretikes as if heresies did spring from the study of the Scriptures and not rather from the neglect and ignorance of them And if he will not beleeue him let another learned Roman si step out tel him that very few ignorāt persons were the authors of heresie another that learned men indued with great wits fall by their pride into heresie so that he need not so much feare lest heresie should build her nest in the bosome of the poore ignorant man as lest like the Eagle shee should flye aloft and set her selfe in the top of the high Cedars of the Church 88. But what doe I stand to ouerthrow this vaine exception since it is no better then a meere deception confuted by the practice of their owne Church for without difference any that will pay for it beeing neuer so ignorant might haue a licence to read the Scriptures And we had heere in England in Queene Maries dayes a Romish indulgence that hee that could dispend a certaine reuenue by the yeere might read the Bible in English as is reported by Master Cartwright in his answere to the Preface of the Rhemes Testament So that is as cleare as the day that it is not the fruit and benefit that should come to the Reader that they regarded but the profit and gaine that should accrue to their owne purses neither was the feare of erring the cause of their prohibition but rather the feare of too much knowledge lest thereby the grosse and foule abominations of their Church should bee discouered and so come to bee abhorred and detested 89. The Gospell teacheth that none can forgiue sins but God because sinne is a preuarication of Gods Law and therefore none can remit it but hee against whom it is committed Vpon which ground venerable Bede writing vpon these words of the fift of Luke Who can forgiue sinnes but God sayth that the Pharises said truely therein because no man can forgiue sinnes saue God alone who also forgiueth by them to whom hee hath committed the power of the keyes and therefore Christ is proued to bee truely God by this that hee can forgiue sinnes as God and it may be proued further to bee true because our Sauiour himselfe approoueth of that speech of theirs not shewing any manner of dislike thereunto And therefore Saint Ambrose affirmeth plainely that to forgiue sinnes is not common to any man with Christ This is sayth he the onely office of Christ who tooke away the sinne of the world And Cyprian as directly Onely the Lord can take pitty and grant pardon to sinnes which are committed against him But the Synagogue of Rome teacheth that though this power bee originally and fundamentally in Christ yet he hath committed the same to his Vicar the Pope and from him it is deriued to Cardinals Bishops and infetiou◠Priests vnder the commission and authority of the keyes and that not ministerially and by way of declaration onely which wee confesse but absolutely and iudicially and as Christ himselfe and that not onely to the liuing but to the dead also that are in Purgatory For it is a rule without exception amongst them that all satisfactory punishments may bee released by a pardon And it is as sure that a pardon for any manner of sinne may bee obtained for a price And therefore there is a certaine rate set downe for all kinde of sinnes as Murther Incests Sodomy Sacriledge c. And Aquinas thus reasoneth If Christ might release the fault without any satisfaction then so may it be that the Pope By which wee see that according to their doctrine the Pope hath asmuch power to forgiue sins as Christ himselfe hath which is the Scribes and Pharises liued and heard they would cry out O blasphemie This is the expresse doctrine of the Church of Rome 90. For the making good of this doctrine they haue a double distinction answerable to the double manner of remitting sin vsed in their Church one touching the absolution of a sinner by the Priest in their Sacrament of penance The other touching the Popes indulgence out of the Sacramēt groūded vpon the treasure of supererogatory works which they say is in the Church and consequently in the Popes dispensation Concerning the first they say that Christ absolueth a sinner by his owne power but the Priest by the power of Christ committed vnto him in that famous Legacy Whose sinnes yee remit on earth they are remitted in Heauen 91. To which I answere two things First that heerein they cōtradict their ancient schoole For Peter Lumbard one of the masters of the schoole doth plainly affirme that such only are worthily absolued by the Church who are absolued in Heauen because by the error of man it may so happen that hee that seemeth to bee cast out of Gods family bee still within and he who may be thoght to remaine within is notwithstanding cast ou◠And that therefore God absolueth differently from the Church God by remitting the sinne purging the soule from the blemish thereof and freeing it from eternall punishment the Church by declaring who are absolued by God By which not onely his opinion is manifest that the Priest hath no absolute power of absoluing a sinner but onely of declaring that hee is absolued which is our doctrine but also his reason is inuincible that because the Priest may erre in his absolution therefore hee hath no such absolute power committed
Laterane himselfe sitting in his Pontificall Throne and the Emperour kneeling before him and holding vp his hands vnto him as vnto God Did Peter euer doe the like Gregory the third deposed Leo surnamed Iconomachus for defacing Images set vp in Churches to bee worshipped Pope Stephen deposed Childerick King of France and set vp Pipin in his roome for no haynous offence by him committed but onely because hee was in his iudgement vnprofitable for the kingdome Gregory the seuenth called Hildebrand would haue deposed Henry the fourth and haue aduanced Rodolph Duke of Sueuia into his throne but that Gods iustice preuented his purpose by bringing Rodolph to an vntimely end and the Pope himselfe to a miserable and fearefull destruction yet afterwards the same Henry was surprised by his owne sonne Henry the fift at the inspiration of the succeeding Popes and depriued and imprisoned and brought to his graue Hadrian the fourth discharged the subiects of William King of Sicilia of their oath and alleageance because hee would not yeeld Apulia to the Pope for inlarging of Saint Peters patrimony Alexander the fift excommunicated the Emperour Frederick as also he had done his predecessour Hadrian and thundred out great curses vpon him and sent letters abroad to all Princes and people to raise tumults against him for punishing some dissolute persons of the Clergy and claiming by warre some rebellious Cities in Italy as they pretended Innocent the third excommunicated Philip and raised vp Otho against him seeking to dispossesse him of his kingdome and after when Otho was inuested with the Empyre hee set vp Frederick the sonne of Henry the sixt against him and deposed Otho Honorius the third persecuted this Frederick depriued him and stirred vp his subiects against him absoluted them from their faith oath and alleageance And the like also did Gregory the ninth and Celestine the fourth and Innocent the fourth against the same man After the same manner was serued King Iohn of England by the fore-named Innocent the fourth because hee banished the Monks that had chosen Stephen Langton to bee Archbishop of Canterbury contrary to his minde 16. What should I reckon Raymundus Earle of Tholouse Or Conrade the son of Frederick the second Or Mamphred the bastard sonne of Frederick Or Peter King of Arragon Or Philip the faire King of France Or Henry the seuenth who being persecuted by Clement the fift was at last poysoned in the Eucharist by a Iacobine Fryer suborned to worke that feate Or Lewes of Bauary Charles the fourth or Wenceslaus or George King of Bohemia or Iohn King of Naâ—arre all which were grieuously persecuted if not vtterly deposed by sundry Popes And lastly our late Queene of famous memory whose life was not once or twise but often assaulted by the Popes instruments and her kingdome so farre as lay in the Popes power taken from her and translated to the Spanish faction Did euer Peter doe the like 17. But to descend from Kings to Bishopâ— the Pope doth challenge to himselfe the fulnesse of power ouer all other Bishops that the fountaine of iurisdiction the authority of the keyes is resident onely in his person and that all other Bishops are subdelegate vnder him and receâ—â—â— their power from him and that they ought to receiue their inuestitures from him alone Did Peter euer doe the like No Hee esteemed all the rest of the Apostles his equals and so our Sauiour Christ inioyned an equality and parity to be among the Apostles albeit they had a superiority ouer the seuenty disciples and all Bishops are the vndoubted successors of the Apostles witnesse Irenaeus Cyprian and Hierome and therefore must needs haue equall power of iurisdiction as those from whom they receiued it were equall this Saint Ierome auoucheth in direct termes when hee sayth Vbicunque fuâ—rit Episcopus c. Wheresoeuer he be Bishop whether at Rome or at Eugubium c. hee is of the same merit and of the same Priesthood And Saint Cyprian Episcopatus vnus est cuius à singulis pars in solidum tenetur The Bishopricke is one whereof euery Bishop hath a found and entyre part 18. Againe the Pope claimeth a Soueraignetâ—e ouer a Councell and that not onely to call it at his pleasure and to dissolue it againe when hee will but also to allow and approue what he lusteth and to disanull whatsoeuer is distastefull vnto his humorous palate in which respect it is set downe as a ruled case amongst them that Although in a generall Councell the vniuersall Church is represented insomuch that nothing is greater then a Councell notwithstanding the Pope surpasseth the same in all manner authoritie and therefore if the whole world should giue sentence against the Pope yet the Popes sentence is to be stood vnto and all other reiected And the reason is giuen because hee is of greater perfection then the whole bodie of the Church beside Did euer Peter doe the like In that Councell of the Apostles and Disciples in the eleuenth of the Acts when as diuers Christians of the Circumcision contended against him for preaching and baptizing Cornelius and his houshold at Cesarea which were of the Gentiles he did not arrogate this supereminencie to himselfe that he was their chiefe and head and therefore ought not to be called to an account by them 〈…〉 that they ought to subiect themselues to his power as one that could not erre no he doth no such matter but meekly rendreth a reckoning of his carriage in this businesse and submitteth himselfe to their censure So Acts 15. when the Apostles and Elders of the Church came together in a Councell to decide that great Controuerfie then mooued in the Church about Circumcision Peter behaueth not himselfe as a Iudge nor taketh vpon him any authoritie aboue the rest but as one of the Apostles giueth his opinion and the determination of the question is set downe not vnder his name onely but in the name of the Apostles Elders and brethren that were present yea Iames was president of that Councell and not Peter if we will beleeue Gerson and Lyran of their owne and Chrysostome of the ancients 19. Againe the Pope taketh vpon him to exempt Clarks though offending by Murder Treason Theft Adulterie or such like from all temporall Courts of Princes and punishment of the Laytie except the Church proceed against them first and make them no Clarkes Thus Pope Nicholas the first wrote to Michael the Emperour Christian Emperors haue no right at all to make any inquisition for Monkes vnlesse it be in fauour to pittie them Thus Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterburie quarrelled with Henrie the Second for this cause principally as both Houeden and Fabain report for that the King went about to punish such of the Clergie as were malefactors by the temporall Lawes of the Land which the Archbishop vtterly denyed to be lawfull For this he said that if a Clarke being