with Hierome and Iustine Martyr and when he entred into the house the dores being shut that the dores and walls yeelded vnto him a passage as vnto their Creator with Theodoret and Cyrill and that when hee appeared vnto Paul going to Damascus if it was in the aire or on the earth as it may be doubted that then this body was not in heauen at the same instant for farre bee it from vs so to pin vp our Lord in the Heauens that he cannot be where he pleaseth And this is Thomas Aquinas opinion in expresse words which Bellarmine as expresly contradicteth 15. Thirdly by discourse of reason hee thus laboureth to reconcile these contradictions and thus disputeth God being but one simple and inuisible essence is in infinite places at once and he might create another world and fill it with his presence and be in two worlds at one instant and the soule of man is wholy in euery part of the body and God is able to conserue the soule in a part that is cut off from the body therefore it implieth no contradiction to be in two places at once againe one place may containe two bodies and yet be not two places but one as when Christ rose out of the graue the Sepulchre being shut therefore one body may be in two places at once and yet not two bodies but one Lastly there be many other mysteries of religion as strange and difficult to be conceiued as this and yet are beleeued therefore this also is to be beleeued as well as they 16. A miserable cause sure that needeth such defences the weakenesse of these reasons argueth the feeblenesse of the cause for who knoweth not but that there is no similitude betweene the infinite God and a finite Creature nor any proportion betwixt a Spirit and a body and that à posse ad esse from may bee to must bee is no good consequence Adde that one place cannot hold two bodies nor euer did except they were so vnited that in respect of place they made but one And lastly that all those mysteries of Religion which he nameth to wit the Trinity the Incarnation the Resurrection the Creation and Annihilation c. haue their foundation in holy Scripture and therefore are to be receiued as doct ines of truth though transcending the spheare of nature and reason but this strange mysterie of Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture as he himselfe confesseth and therefore it is not to be beleeued as the other are without better reasons then he bringeth for the defence thereof but like lips like lettuces such as the cause is such are the defences both nought and weake as any man may see that is not muffled with errour and thus this second contradiction remaines irreconciliable 17. A third contradiction is also in and about the Sacrament which is this they teach that the matter in Sacrament is partly the outward Elements and partly the thing signified and represented by them and that betwixt these there is a certaine relation and similitude as in Baptisme the outward signe which is water and the thing signified which is the bloud of Christ make the matter of that Sacrament or the outward wasting by water and the inward by the Spirit and the relation is as the water washeth and purgeth away all filthinesse of the body so Christs bloud purgeth away both the guilt and filth of sinne from the soule and so in the Eucharist the Elements of Bread and Wine together with the bodie and bloud of Christ are the matter of the Sacrament and the relation is as those elements doe feed nourish and strengthen and cheare the bodie of man so the body and bloud of Christ doe seed nourish and strengthen and cheare the soule vnto eternall life and as those elements must be eaten and digested or else they nourish not so Christ must also be eaten and as it were digested and after a sort conuerted into our substance or else he is no food vnto our soules This is the very doctrine of the Church of Rome and it is agreeable to the truth for Bellarmine thus speaketh Species illae significant quidem cibum spiritualem sed non sunt ipsae cibus spiritualis that is The signes in the Scrament signifie our spirituall foode but they are not the spirituall foode it selfe And in another place he saith that signum in Sacramento reisignatae similitudinem gerit The signes in the Sacrament doe beare the similitude of the thing signified And in the same Chapter hee sayth more plainely that God would neuer haue ordained one thing to signifie another vnlesse it had a certaine analogie or similitude with it And herein he accordeth with the Master of sentences who defines a Sacrament thus To be a visible forme of an inuisible grace bearing the Image of that grace And with Hugo who saith That a Sacrament is a corporall or materiall element propounded outwardly to the senses by similitude representing and by institution signifying and by Sanctification containing some inuisible and spirituall grace And that this relation is in eating and nourishing Bellarmine in another place confesseth in direct words when he saith that That same outward eating in the Sacrament doth signifie the inward eating and refreshing of the soule but is not the cause thereof and that that is so necessarie a condition that without it we should not be partakers of that diuine nourishment And to this agreeth Saint Augustine who plainely affirmeth that if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not Sacraments at all And what this similitude is he declareth in another place where hee saith that We receaue visible meate in the Sacrament but the Sacrament is one thing and the vertue of the Sacrament is another And Thomas Aquinas giueth this as a reason why Bread and Wine are the fittest matter of this Sacrament because men most commonly are nourished therewith his words are these As water is assumed in the Sacrament of Baptisme to the vse of spirituall washing because corporall washing is commonly made by water so bread and wine wherewith most commonly men are nourished are taken vp in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to the vse of the spirituall eating By which it followeth that if water did not wash it was no fit element for the Sacrament of Baptisme so if bread and wine doe not nourish they are no fit signes for the Lords Supper and for this cause our Sauiour at the institution of this Sacrament gaue this commandement to his Disciples that they should take and eate and the Apostle calleth it the Lords Supper and the Lords Table 18. This therefore is their own doctrine and it is grounded vpon the truth But listen a little how they contradict this by their miraculous monster Transubstantiation for when they say that the substance of the bread and wine is vtterly
righteousnesse So that wee exclude not from this faith repentance amendment of life new obedience c. Lastly by Ferus Stapulensis Peraldus and diuers others yea almost all of them when at the point of death they come to the point of try all flye to this sacred anchor of Christs righteousnesse alone renouncing all righteousnesse in themselues as the famous example of Stephen Gardiner declareth who lying on his death-bed reposed himselfe on the righteousnesse of Christ only for his saluation and being told that it was contrarie to his former resolution answered that though it was the truth yet that gappe was not to bee opened to the people 48. The Protestants hold that our best workes are stayned with so many imperfections that they cannot merit any thing at Gods hand except it be hell fire and damnation and that though God of his mercie reward good workes with eternall life yet it is not for any condignity that is in them but for Christs sake into whom the partie working is ingrafted and made a member Many learned Romanists are of the same opinion Bellarmine sayth that in regard of the vncertaintie of our owne righteousnesse and danger of vaine glorie the safest way is to put our confidence in the sole mercie and goodnesse of God Waldensis writeth Hee is a sounder Diuine a faithfuller Catholicke and more agreeing to the Scriptures that simply denieth merits and sayth that the Kingdome of Heauen is from the mere grace and will of the giuer not from any desert of the Receiuer Of the same opinion was Albertus Pighius as witnesseth Bellarmine Ferus sayth Whatsoeuer God giueth vs is of grace not of debt If therefore thou desire to hold the grace and fauour of God make no mention of thy merits The same hold Gregorius Ariminensis Durandus Stella with many more renouncing all the new Rhemish doctrine of merits of condignitie taught by the Schoole fourbished ouer by the Councell of Trent and refining Iesuites All these being sworne subiects to the Church of Rome yet being constrained by the conscience of the truth doe as fully and perfectly maintaine our doctrine as if they were the rankest Protestants in the World 49. Protestants denie all free will to grace before it bee quickned and liued by Gods Spirit Many learned Romanists teach the same doctrine Laurentius Valla as Bellarmine reports wished that the name of free-will were vtterly taken away The Master of Sentences auouched that free-will before grace repaire it is pressed ouercome with cōcupiscence hath weaknesse in euill but no grace in good and therefore cannot but sinne damnably Dom. Bannes affirmeth that it is false and worse then false that any man without the speciall and supernaturall helpe of God can be able to doe a supernaturall act Ariminensis calleth the Romish doctrine of free-wil Pelagianisme The Iesuite Suarez sayth that diuers Romanists say that it is a rash and hereticall opinion to affirme that when grace is equally offered to two that one of them could be conuerted and not the other What could any Protestant say more 50. Transubstantiation circumgestation and subtraction of the Cuppe are denyed by many of their owne side as well as by vs. Durand sayth It is great rashnesse to thinke the bodie of Christ by his diuine power cannot bee in the Sacrament vnlesse the bread be conuerted into it and therefore that he holdeth the contrarie onely for the Churches determination So also sayth Scotus There is no Scripture to enforce Transubstantiation except ye bring the Church of Romes exposition Occham sayth that that opinion that the substance of the bread remaineth is subiect to lesse inconueniences and lesse repugnant to reason and holy Scripture The custome of circumgestation of the hoast sayth Cassander may be left with greater profit to the Church if it bee wisely laid downe both because it is but a new inuention as also because it seruethrather for pompous ostentation then for any godly deuotion and so as Albertus Crantzius sayth is contrary to Christs institution Pope Gelasius witnesse Gregorie of Valintia said that the substance of the bread and wine in the Eucharist doe not lose their nature Touching abstraction of the Cuppe their learned Cassander acknowledgeth that for the space of a thousand yeeres after Christ the people communicated in both kindes and that in Greece and Armenia they doe still and the best Catholickes earnestly desire a reformation of this matter in the Church of Rome And Durand their Schooleman that the receiuing in one kind onely is not a full sacrament all receiuing for though that in the consecrated hoast Christs bloud bee contained yet it is not there sacramentally in that the bread signifieth the bodie and not the bloud and the wine the bloud and not the bodie Of the same mind were Alexander Alensis Albertus magnus Biel with others more this last affirming that in the Apostles times all did receiue the wine aswell as the bread because God is no respecter of persons The second that it is of greater vse and profit to the faithfull and the first that it is a matter of greater merit Thus all these Schoolemen doe protestantize in this point 51. Auricular confession is denied by Protestants to be necessarie for the remission of sinnes and to bee commanded by God The same is auerred by Panormitane Peresius Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus Caietane c. all of them concluding with one voyce that it is a doctrine deriued onely from a positiue Law of the Church and not from the Law of God yea and the last that is named to wit Cardinall Caietane is bold to say that it is so farre from being commanded that euery one should be shriuen before hee come to the Communion that the contrarie is insinuated by the Apostle where hee sayth Let a mantry himselfe And Gratian confesseth that Ambrose Augustine Chrysostome Theophilact and other Greeke Fathers thought that secret confession was not necessarie And lastly Acosta a famous Iesuite auoucheth that it would be well for the Indians if the bond of confession might bee taken away lest they should bee constrained to commit so many and so grieuous sacriledges 52. So the Romish doctrine of satisfactions is vtterly condemned by Protestants and not onely by them but by many of their owne learned Doctours for the Diuines of Louaine as Bellarmine witnesseth of them and others did certainly defend that the sufferings of Saints cannot bee true satisfactions but that our punishments are remitted onely by the personall satisfaction of Christ And Panormitane sayth that a man may be inwardly so penitent and contrite that he shall need no satisfaction at all but may bee absolued presently without any penance doing And another that the treasure of Indulgences doth consist onely of the merits of Christ and not of the satisfactions of Saints because the merits of Christ are of infinite valew 53.
shew also how good workes to wit almse-deedes pilgrimages workes of supererogation vowed chastity voluntary pouerty Monkish obedience which they esteeme the chiefest good workes are made Idols in that they repose the confidence of their heart and the hope of saluation in them through the power of meriting which they ascribe vnto them as also how they turne their Sacraments into Idols by teaching that they conferre grace Ex opere operato by the very worke done and that effectiuely actiuely and immediatly they produce in the heart the grace of regeneration and iustification which is the proper and immediate worke of the Godhead but I passe ouer these many other things because they admit in shew some probable exception though no sound confutation and I insist in those things onely in which euery Ideot and almost Infant may discerne most grosse and palpable Idolatry And those are these fiue in number the bread in the Sacrament Images Reliques Angels and Saints departed And lastly the Crosse and Crucifix of which in order 14. The blessed Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ ordayned for a perpetuall remembrance of his death and passion and for the strengthning and nourishing of the soules of the faithfull to eternall life is transhaped by them into a most horrible Idoll For this they teach and practise that that very thing which to all the senses is but bread being but lately moulded and knead by the Baker is to be worshipped and adored with diuine worship because forsooth after consecration it is the true and naturall body of Christ And therefore at the Priests eleuation of the hoast they all fall downe vpon their knees and worship it with great deuotion and expect from it forgiuenesse of their sinnes and all manner of earthly and temporall blessings and whosoeuer refuseth to doe this is an Heretike 15. Their Apologie is that there is a reall and naturall presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament and therefore not the bread but the body of Christ into which the bread is transubstantiate is worshipped of them and so they thinke to free themselues To which I answere that if that were certaine then their defence was iust and their practice godly and we in calling them Idolaters for this cause should bee slanderers of the truth but seeing the contrary is rather certaine to wit that Christ is not corporally in the Sacrament but in heauen and that the bread remayneth still true bread both for matter and forme after consecration they cannot be excused from notorious Idolatry in worshipping a piece of Bakers bread in stead of Christ the eternall Sonne of God for to the outward senses it beareth the shape taste figure and colour of bread This is certaine and to the vnderstanding in reason it is bread because accidents cannot be without a substance this is as certaine and to faith it is bread because the Word which is the foundation of saith so calleth it after the words of consecration neither is there any Scripture to auouch the contrary saue that which may well receiue our interpretation as well yea better then theirs as the best learned amongst them confesse for Bellarmine confesseth that it may iustly bee doubted whether the Text this is my body be cleare inough to enforce transubstantiation And Scotus and Cameracensis thinke our opinion more agreeable to the words of institution and thus they haue against them sense and reason and faith and for them onely a doubtfull Exposition of two or three places of Scripture and therefore three to one but they are guilty of Idolatry 16. Besides graunt that there is a reall transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ yet the accidents of bread and wine remaine vnchanged and the forme and shape Now howsoeuer the learned may here distinguish their worship from the outward accidents to the inward substance yet the common people are not able so to doe but worship confusedly the outward accidents together with Christ contayned vnder them and so in that respect are Idolaters also for accidents be creatures as well as substances Yea and Bellarmine also doth allow them so to dâ—e for thus he writeth Diuine worship doth appertaine to the Symboles and signes of bread and wine so farre forth as they are apprehended as being vnited to Christ whom they containe Euen as they that worshipped Christ vpon earth being clothed did not worship him alone but after a sort his garments also Here is a braue straine of Diuinity they worshipped Christ in his clothes therfore they worshipped Christs clothes So Christ is worshipped vnder the formes of bread and wine therefore the formes of bread and wine must be worshipped This is like the Asse which bore vpon his backe the Image of Isis and when men fell downe before the Image he thought they worshipped him but hee was corrected with a cudgell for his sawcinesse and so are they worthy for their folly that cannot distinguish betwixt a man and his garments Christ and the signes of Christ but promiscuously confound the worship of the one with the other Rather therefore may we thus conclude they which worshipped Christ on earth did not worship his garments that he wore therefore they which will worship Christ in the Sacrament must not worship the outward Elements and so it will follow that as it had beene Idolatry in any to worship the garments of Christ so it is in the Romanists to worship the accidents of bread and wine 17. Lastly let it be supposed that there is such a reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament yet according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome no man can be certaine when it is because it depends vpon the intention of the Priest for thus they teach if the Priest should say the words of consecration without intention to consecrate the bread and wine he should effect nothing or if hee intend to consecrate but one hoast and there chance to be two or more then nothing is consecrated at all and so the intention of the Priest being vncertaine to the people there must needes be an vncertaine adoration and the Priest oftentimes intending nothing lesse then the matter it selfe which hee hath in hand there must needes be certaine and vndoubted Idolatry for if the bread and wine be not effectually consecrated as they are not without the Priests intention then Christ is not really present and so nothing is worshipped but the bare bread for remedy hereof they haue deuised two poore shifts one that the people must adore vpon a condition to wit if the due forme in consecrating bee obserued the other that an actuall intention is not necessarily required but onely a vertuall that is when an actuall intention to consecrate is not present at the very time of consecration by reason of some vagation of the minde yet it was present a little before the operation is in vertue
changed into the body and bloud of Christ and that onely the accidents remaine I would faine know of them how these outward signes doe nourish the bodie can the accidents of bread and wine nourish the substance of the bodie must there not be a similitude and proportion betwixt the nourishment and the thing nourished but betwixt accidents and a substance there is no similitude nor proportion Aristotle telleth vs as much when he saith that Foode doth nourish as it is a substance and not as an accident Now if the outward signes doe not nourish the body what analogie is there betwixt them and the things signified or why were they ordayned to represent the spirituall refection of our soules by Christ if they minister no corporall refection vnto our bodies or how can they represent that where of they beare no similitude for as in Baptisme if the nature and substance of the water were taken away and onely accidents did remayne so that it could not wash nor clense the body without doubt it could be no fit signe to signifie the inward ablution of the soule by the bloud of Christ So they that take away the nature and substance of the Bread and Wine and leauâ— bare accidents make it without all question a dead and liuelesse Sacrament not fit to represent so high a mystery 19 Behold now the contradictions first accidents without a substance that is to say accidents and no accidents for therefore they are called accidents because they adhere and are ioyned to a substance in which they haue their subsistance vpon which they haue their dependance so that take away their substance and they presently â—urcease to bee accidents For Aristotle saith Accidentis esse est in esse The essence of an accident is to bee in a subiect Secondly two parts of the Sacraments the visible elements and the inuisible grace yet but one part of the same Sacrament for the elements bee taken away and accidents onely remayne therefore two parts and not two parts Thirdly the externall matter of the Sacrament is the outward elements and yet there are no elements at all and so elements and no elements matter and no matter Fourthly the outward elements are signes of the inward grace and the same by their doctrine being but accidents are signes of the outward elements which are signes of the inward grace and so they are signes of the signes rather then of the thing signified Lastly the outward feeding by bread wine represents the inward feeding by the body and bloud of Christ yet there is no outward feeding by bread and wine because there is no bread and wine except they will make accidents to â—eede a substance which is against all reason for the Philosopher saith that Ex iâ—sdem nutrimur ex quibus sumus wee are nourished by the same things of which we consist but we do not consist of accidents but of substances 20. Out of this snare they seeke to ridde themselues by a double euasion first they say that accidents may be without a subiect though not naturally yet by the supernaturall power of God This is Bellarmines and hee prooueth it by two instances first because Saint Basil affirmeth that That light which was created the first day was without a subiect and secondly because as the substance of Christs humanitie had no subsistance in it selfe but in the word so though an accident naturally doth inhere in a subiect yet supernaturally it may bee and yet not inhere To this I answere first that though Saint Basil be of that opinion yet Saint Augustine is not for he thought it to be a spirituall and no naturall light Nor Beda Lyranâ—s and the master of sentences who supposed it to be a bright and lightsome cloude which was carried about and gaue light vnto the world Nor Damascene who supposed that this light proceeded from the element of fire as an effect thereof Nor yet the Fathers who though they differed in their opinions touching this light yet none of them were of Saint Basils mind to thinke that it was an accident without a subiect Now why should we beleeue Saint Basil herein more then S. Augustine venerable Bede Damascene or the rest This therefore is but one priuate mans opinion crossed by many others and so maketh little for his purpose 21. Secondly I answere that though the humanitie of Christ had no subsistance in it selfe yet by reason of the vnion with the God-head it was sustained and vpholden by it but there is no such vnion betwixt the accidents in the Sacraments and the body and bloud of Christ that the body and bloud of Christ should sustaine and vphold those accidents and therefore they themselues say that they are not sustained by the body of Christ but by the extraordinary power of God and so this instance maketh nothing for this purpose neither Lastly I answere that we are not so much to consider what God can doe by his omnipotent power as what he hath done heretofore or what he hath said hee will doe hereafter let them therefore shew that accidents haue beene without a substance in times past or that God hath said hee will haue them so to be and then wee will yeeld vnto them but till then wee haue more reason to hold conclusions of nature not crossed by religion then to relye vpon supernaturall imaginations 22. The second euasion is by Aquinas who affirmeth that supernaturally the accidents of bread and wine may nourish because they receaue miraculously the strength and vertue of a substance and that they doe nourish he proueth because by the same reason they may be turned into the substance of the body by the which they are turned into ashes wormes and also because wee see by experience that the body is nourished by the signes in the Sacrament to which a short answere will suffice for first that there should be such a miraculous nourishing by accidents hath no ground either in experience or in Scripture And secondly he should rather conclude because the body is nourished by outward elements and they are often conuerted into ashes and wormes therefore they are not bare accidents but substances then that therefore bare accidents may nourish for let the reader iudge whether concludes more reasonably we when we say the elements doe nourish the body therefore they are bodily substances or they that thus reason the elements do nourish the bodie therefore accidents without a substance may nourish and thus the snare is not broken neither are they escaped 23. A fourth contradiction and that about the Sacrament they hold that the wicked and reprobate receaue the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament and yet reape no benefit thereby to their owne soules but rather iudgement and damnation as if the merits grace and vertue of Christ could be separated from his person or as if a man could receaue life and yet not
liue sanctification and not be sanctified righteousnes and not be righteous redemption and not be redeemed for all these is Christ made vnto vs Life Righteousnes Sanctification and Redemption as the Scripture testifieth Bellarmine spendeth one whole Chapter in this argument to proue that the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament and therevpon expresly affirmeth that though they receiue him yet they receiue not his iustifying grace nor his merits nor the fruit and effect of his death and passion together with him Of the same mind is Aquinas the rest of their Diuines Now this position is contrary both to Scripture Fathers and to their owne diuinity To Scripture for our Sauiour saith in expresse words Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day And againe He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him But say they The wicked yea the reprobate eate the very flesh and drinke the very bloud of Christ Therefore conclude that they haue eternall life and dwell in Christ and Christ in them neither can they escape by saying that the spirituall eating of Christ by faith and not the eating in the Sacrament is here vnderstood seeing they doe all for the most part interpret this place of the Sacramentall eating and drinking but more plaine if it be possible is that of S. Iohn Ioh. 5. 12. He that hath the Sonne hath life and hee that hath not the Sonne of God hath not life From which place thus a man may reason He that hath Christ hath eternall life but hee that receiueth Christ verily truely as all the wicked do in the Sacrament by their doctrine hath Christ therefore the very reprobate euen Iudas himself hath eternal life is saued for either they must deny that they receiue Christ in the Sacrament or else they must grant being conuicted by these Scriptures that together with him they receiue eternall life 25. They reply to this two things first that the wicked receiue Christ onely Sacramentally and not Spiritually and therefore they haue no benefite by him and secondly because they receiue him vnworthily therefore they receiue their owne iudgement and not saluation not discerning the body and bloud of Christ To which I answere that though they receiue Sacramentally and vnworthily yet by their doctrine they receiue vâ—ry Christ and so by these Scriptures it must needs follow that they also receiue the fruite and effect of his death which is life and saluation Adde hereunto that the termes here vsed are generall both in respect of the persons that receiue and also the manner of receiuing without any such exception or distinction as they deuise and therfore I conclude that it is as impossible to make a separation betwixt Christ and his sauing grace as to separate the Sunne from light fire from heate or the soule from naturall life 26. Thus this position is an opposition to Scripture so it is also to the opinions of the Fathers To giue a taste of some two or three Origen saith That Christ is that true meat which whosoeuer eateth shall liue for euer which no wicked man can eat Augustine more effectually saith Hee that is in the vnity of Christs body that is a member of Christ he is truely said to eate Christs body and drinke his bloud Note hee saith truely to signifie that all other eate him falsly that is in shew and not in substance And in another place yet more plainely Hee which disagreeth from Christ doth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud though he take the Sacrament of so great a thing to his iudgement Theodoret as plainely saith That Christ is meate for his owne sheepe onely that is his elect And Cyrill that as many as eate his flesh haue life in them being ioyned to him who is life it selfe And Basill saith that they which are fed with the foode of life to wit the bread that came downe from heauen haue an inward mouth of the minde whereby they eate that spirituall food Many more such like sayings might be heaped together to this purpose which for breuity sake I passe ouer all which are contrary to that Romish position that the wicked eate and drinke the very body and bloud of Christ which they must needs doe if the bread and wine after the words of consecration be changed into the very body and bloud of Christ 27. Lastly it is contrary to their owne diuinity for they hold that the parts of this Sacrament as of all others are two to wit the matter and the forme the forme in this Sacrament is to the whole word of consecration together with the sense thereof the matter is the whole element with the signification thereof As for example in the Eucharist the matter is the species of Bread and wine containing vnder them the body and bloud of Christ and the forme is for this is my bodie this is my bloud Now hence I thus reason The wicked either receiue the whole Sacrament or they receiue it not if they do then there is no difference betwixt the faithfull and them for they receiue no more and why should not they be saued then as well as they if they do not then either they receiue not Christ at all because we are sure they receiue the outward Elements and therfore if any thing be wanting it must needs be the thing signified or there are more parts then these two of the Sacrament Againe thus if the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament and yet not the vertue of Christ then they receiue not the whole Sacrament because the vertue of the Sacrament is in the Sacrament as the vertue of euery thing is in the thing it selfe And so it followeth that the wicked in the Sacrament receiue Christ and yet not Christ the whole Sacrament and yet but a part of the Sacrament and that there are but two parts of it and yet more then two Obserue gentle Reader these contradictions and wonder 28. Againe Transubstantiation is contradicted both by the doctrine of adoration of Images and by the Canon of the Masse by the doctrine of adoration of Images thus they teach that diuine adoration is to be giuen to the pictures of Christ and God the Father because they represent their most excellent and diuine persons and yet they would haue the very body and bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament transubstantiated because some of the Fathers pretend â—o say that it is to be adored with diuine worship Now if it bee true that they say that Images of God the Father and of Christ our Sauiour ought to be adored with diuine worship because they represent their persons then it must bee false that therfeore the bodie and bloud of Christ are really and carnally in the Sacrament because it is to be worshipped for why may not those mysteries of bread and
Popes Leo the first Gelasius Gregory the great and Gregory the third doe all directly conclude the same doctrine yea the last of the foure commandeth that euen Lepers if they bee Christians which should not bee admitted to our owne Tables yet should not bee barred from the participation of the body and blood of Christ For schoolmen Durand Biell Caietane doe with one consent auouch that all without exception were to drinke of the cup because God is no respecter of persons and that this custome of communicating with both kindes indured long in the Church And whereas Thomas Aquinas sayth that to auoid irreuerence it is wisely obserued in certaine Churches that the blood should not be receiued of the people but of the Priests onely It is to bee marked first that hee sayth in certaine Churches by which he confesseth that it was not vniuersally receiued in his dayes and secondly that it is wisely obserued by which hee insinuates that before time it was not obserued but indiscreetly neglected 50. Lastly for the Fathers it would bee too tedious to recite all their testimonies onely therefore I referre the Reader to the places quoted in the margent or if he desire to behold at one view all their opinions to Plesseis first booke tenth Chapter of the Masse where he shall finde a whole catalogue of them I will content my selfe with one onely saying of Chrysostome in his eighteenth Homily vpon the first to the Corinthians hee thus writeth Sometime there is no difference betwixt the Priest and the people as to wit at the receiuing of the sacred mysteries for all are admitted to them alike for though in the old Testament it was not lawfull for the people to eat of the same things with the Priests yet the matter is otherwise now for one body and one cup is propounded vnto all This doctrine therefore is an Innouation by the iudgement of all these 51. Transubstantiation commeth in the next place which though they labour tooth and naile to procue to bee of great antiquity yet we haue the testimony of Scotus of Tonstall and of Biell who affirme that before the Councill of Lateran which was in the yeere 1215. Transubstantiation was no doctrine of faith and that it was free for all men till that time to follow their owne coniecture as concerning the manner of of the presence Lumbard also sayth that he is not able to define what manner of conuersion is in the Sacrament and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that the name transubstantiation was first found out and brought into the world by the Laterane Councill though hee labour to proue that the thing it selfe was beleeued long before And thus howsoeuer this bastard Babe was borne before yet it is not denyed but that it was then Christened 52. And how long before was it borne I pray you Marry Bellarmine alledgeth two Councils both held at Rome one vnder Nicholas the second the other vnder Gregory the seuenth in both which Berengarius was constrained to abiure his heresie as he calleth it and to subscribe to this article that the bread and wine after consecration are changed into the very body and blood of Christ but concerning the Councill vnder Gregory the seuenth wee haue iust causes to doubt whether there were any such or no first because the acts of it are no where to bee sound and secondly because the same Pope Gregory is reported by Cardinall Benno to haue doubted whether the opinion of Berengarius or of the Church of Rome were more sound And for the other Councill vnder Nicholas the second Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Berengarius was constrained onely to confesse the reall presence and not transubstantiation and so indeed in both of them not the manner of the presence which is transubstantiation but the realty thereof was in question But let it be granted that it was decreed in these two Councils yet the antiquity is not very great for the eldest of them was but in the yeere 1059. 53. As for the opiniō of the Church from the firstage of it vntill these times thogh Bellarmine produceth many testimonies of the Fathers yet either they are counterfeit or little to the purpose or at least wise misapplied vnderstood whereas the testimonies of the same Fathers others produced by vs against this doctrine are so plaine direct and peremptory that by no sound reason they can be auoided I may not ouer-burden the Reader with a repetition of them they may finde thē els-where at large discoursed so that thogh the iust time cannot bee assigned when this errour sprung in the Church yet it is a nouell doctrine borne since the purer times of the Gospell and growing in stature and strength till the Laterane Councill and then taking it name and full perfection 54. Their priuate Masses may be ranked in the next place I meane such priuate Masses wherein the Priest alone doth participate the Sacrament without the people This is a doctrine and practice in the Church of Rome as may appeare both in the Councill of Trent where it is approoued for Catholike and lawfull and in Bellarmine and others which haue their mouthes full of arguments to defend the same but I will not meddle with their arguments onely my taske is to prooue it to bee a nouelty which I may well doe by these three reasons First because it is contrary to our Sauiours first institution Secondly to the writing and practising of the Apostles and thirdly to the example of the Primitiue Church That it is contrary to Christs first institution it is euident because Christ at his last Supper did not take the bread and wine alone his Apostles beholding and looking on and consecrate them and so eat and drinke them himselfe but gaue both the Elements vnto them all and bade them eat and drinke them in remembrance of him this was the first institution of the Sacrament which ought to be a patterne to the Church of God for euer But Bellarmine sayth that it was but an affirmatiue precept of our Sauiour therefore did bind no further then the circumstance of time place and person would permit and that to communicate in the Sacrament was no essentiall part thereof and therefore might bee omitted vpon occasion To which I answere that though it bee false which hee sayth touching communicating in the Sacrament that it is no essentiall part thereof for the contrary may be prooued both by Scripture which calleth the whole Sacrament a Communion 1. Cor. 10. and by analogy of the Passeouer in the Law which was to bee eaten of all by the confession of their owne learned Schooleman Gabriel Piel who sayth that the consecration in the Eucharist is ordained for the vse which is the eating of it as vnto the next end after a sort yet it is sufficient for our purpose that he confesseth that it is a variation from the first institution and therefore
without question an Innouation 55. Secondly that it is contrary to the doctrine and practice of the Apostles appeareth by this because the Apostle Saint Paul sometimes calleth the ministration of the Sacrament a breaking of bread and that through housholds By which is necessarily insinuated a distribution and dispensation of it to others besides the Priest Sometimes the communion or communication of the body and blood of Christ Yea the Apostle sayth plainly that wee that are many are one bread and one body because wee are partakers of one bread but if it bee priuate then there is no communion neither are there many and neither is the bread which is made of many graines of corne nor the wine crushed out of many grapes a representation of the mysticall body of Christ as all diuines confesse aswell as of the naturall if there bee no mysticall body that is no Congregation to participate Lastly Chrysostome writing vpon 1. Cor. 11. sayth that this was the fault which the Apostle blameth in the Corinthians because they made that priuate which was the Lords for the Supper of the Lord sayth hee ought to bee common 56. Thirdly what the example of the Primitiue Church was after the Apostles the ancient Lyturgies then in vse doe declare in none of which can wee finde any colour for this practice which euidence caused iudicious Cassander to confesse that solitary Masses are most manifestly confuted by the ancient Greeke Lyturgies and that which hee sayth of the Greeke may bee iustly auerred of all the other ancient missals that were in vse of the Church and are extant in the writings of the Fathers as Chrysostomes Ambroses Gregories and such like yea the Canon of the Romish masse it selfe is against this errour for it is said there As many of vs haue beene partakers and Blesse O Lord these Sacraments to vs which wee haue receiued Now how can this bee said without mockage when there is none present but the Priest 57. But besides those Lyturgies wee haue the plaine testimonies of ancient Fathers one Chrysostome for breuities sake shall stand insteed of all hee thus propoundeth the custome of the Church in his time The dayly oblation sayth he is made in vaine when there is none to participate and again Whosoeuer is not partaker of the mysteries stand by as a foolish and wicked man This is flat contrary to the Romish practice where the Priest masseth alone the people kneele by knocking their brests and lifting vp their eyes to their breaden God you see then there was no such custome in Chrysostomes time and this further may bee confirmed by the tenth Canon of those that are called Apostolicall which doth forbid any to be present but such as doe communicate saying that they are disturbers of the order of the Church the same Canon also is repeated and confirmed in the Councill of Antioch cap. 2. And in the Councill Naxâ—â—tense it is said that it is a ridiculous thing to murmure to the walles that which should belong to the people Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth that it is a more perfect and lawfull Masse where communicants are present then where they are absent so doth Cardinal Humbertus and Walasred all which laide together caused Erasmus and Cassander in expresse words to affirme this practice to bee a nouelty not instituted by Christ nor vsed either in the Apostles times or in the Primitiue Church 58. The next point may bee touching the sacrifice in the Masse for they teach that there is offered vp by the Priest a true reall propitiatory sacrifice for the quick and the dead this is the direct doctrine of the Romish Church canonized in the Councill of Trent which doctrine how true it is I will not dispute onely I am to shew how new it is which may appeare first in that throughout all the new Testament where there is any mentioÌ„ made of the Lords supper there is not one word spoken of a sacrifice for neither doth our Sauiour himselfe say that hee offered a sacrifice when he first instituted it neither doth Saint Paul call it by that name when hee deliuers the full doctrine thereof to the Corinthians neither doth Saint Luke affirme that the Apostles offered a sacrifice when they put it in practice but onely that they broke bread from house to house now if this had beene so essentiall a part of the Eucharist as the Romanists make it yea if it had beene any part at all our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would neuer haue concealed it from the Church 59. If they obiect that though a sacrifice bee not mentioned yet it was acted both because Melchizedek was a type of Christ and he offered bread and wine and also because these words Hoc facite Doe this asmuch as Sacrificate sacrifice I answere that neither did Melchizedek offer bread and wine but brought it foorth onely to the refreshing of Abraham and his fellowers as the Chaldy Paraphrase the Greeke interpretours Iosephus Cyprian and Chrysostome doe interpret the place and the words themselues in the originall doe import neither doth the verbe facere signifie to sacrifice in that place seeing as euery schoole-boy knoweth then it should bee construed with an Ablatiue and not with an Accusatiue case as heere it is and this they themselues doe euidently prooue when they cannot agree among themselues in which action of the Sacrament consisteth the essence and perfection of this sacrifice whether in the eleuation which Sotus thought to belong vnto it or in the consecration as Suares or in the oblation as Ecchius or in the intinction as Canus or in the dispensation and distribution as others or in the consumption as Bellarmine and Ledesima and so they know not where to fixe the center thereof hauing indeed no footing in the whole circle of our Sauiours example 60. And as for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by Saint Luke it signifieth no more but Sacra administratio the performance of holy duties or the seruing of God in any sort of religious worship as the Fathers doe all interpret the place and not to offer a sacrifice as Erasmus translates it or to say Masse as our Rhemists would interpret it for then the Angels should say Masse in Heauen because they are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 1. which some of them are not ashamed to say they doe but I beleeue it all alike as I doe that tale in their Legend of Bees singing Masse in their Hyue about the hoste put in by 2 woman to make her swarmes to thriue Againe of the like nature is that fond conclusion of Genebrard who because by the Leuitical Law God coÌ„manded Cakes of new corne to be offered vpoÌ„ the day of Pentecost which is there called A new offering therefore the Apostles sung the first Masse vpon that great day of Pentecost Act. 2. and that Iames being Bishop of Hierusalem was the chiefe
vncleannesse and some Angels of the bottomles pit by couetousnes and a little after Not a few of our moderne Priests doe serue the most vild and filthy God Priapus Panormitane a man of great fame in the Councell of Basill after he had shewen the vowe of continencie not to be of the essence of Priest-hood nor by the lawe of God but a constitution of the Church addeth these words I beleeue that it were a wholesome ordinance for the good saluation of soules to leaue it to mâ—ns owne wils to marrie or not because experience doth show that now a daies they doe not liue spiritually and vndefiledly but that they are defiled by vnlawfull copulation whereas they might liue chastly with their owne wiues 37. I could adde vnto these testimonies the report of Iohn Gerson touching his time who complained that some Cloysters of Nunnes were become Stewes of strumpets and whores And of Mantuan a Carmelite Italian Frier whose verses touching this poynt are sufficiently knowne Patrum vita fuit melior cum coniuge quà m nunc Nostra sit exclusis thalamis coniugis vsu The life of the Fathers was better being married then ours to whom marriage is forbidden and of Polidor Virgill who liued in King Henrie the Eights daies whose censure is this that this enforced chastity is so farre from excelling that marriage-chastity that no crime hath brought more shame to the order of Priesthood more euill to Religion nor more griefe to all good men then that blot of the filthinesse of Priests But that I feare I haue too much offeÌ„ded chaste eares already with raking into this dunghill I conclude with the report of Martin Luther he saith that he saw Cardinals at Rome which were accounted holy for no other cause but that they were content onely to commit fornication and adultery with women and did not giue themselues to other vnnaturall lusts Thus as it were in a mappe I haue described the filthy and abominable fruites that proceed from that Romish doctrine of vowed chastitie Is it possible that the spring should be good when the streams are thus corrupt 38. The fift doctrine of Poperie giuing manifest occasion of liberty to the professours thereof is their doctrine of veniall sinnes By which they teach that many acts which are transgressions of the laws of God men yet are not properly sins nor deserue the wrath of God but of their nature are pardonable and therfore he which committeth any such doth neither offer iniury to God nor breake charity in respect of his neighbour and so deserues not hell nor is bound to be sorry for them but that the knocking of the brest going to Church being sprinckled with holy water or the Bishops blessing or crossing ones selfe or doing any worke of charity though we neuer thinke actually of them is a sufficient satisfaction for them This is the doctrine not onely of the Schoolemen but also of the finest and refyning Iesuites euen of Bellarmine himselfe who thus distinguisheth veniall sinnes that some are veniall of their own nature and kind to wit such as haue for their obiect an euill and inordinate matter but which is not repugnant to the law of God and of our neighbour others are veniall by the imperfection of the worke which imperfection ariseth partly ex surreptione that is by vnaduised falling into them without full consent of will and partly ex paruitate materiae by the smalnesse of the matter which is committed as if a man should steale a halfe-peny or some such trifle This is the Cardinals doctrine which as neere as I could I hauâ— word for word set downe And that wee may more fully vnderstand their meaning they affirme in very deede that they are no sinnes but aequiuoce that is so called but not â—o in truth for the word peccatum sinne doth not vniuoce aâ—â—ee 〈…〉 eniall sinnes as it doth to mortall and therefore it is their generall opinion that they are not against but beside the lawe that is in plaine words not sinne for euery sinne is a transgression of the law Now let the Readeriudge whether our doctrine that all sinnes of their owne nature are mortall and deserue condemnation except they be repeÌ„ted of or heirs that some are veniall and binde not the offender to condemnation doe more tend to liberty whether we restraine more the people from sinning that thus say vnto them All your sinnes though neuer so small are of their owne nature damnable except by faith in the bloud of Christ they be purged away and by repentance which is a fruite of faith sorrowed for and laboured against or they that say thus to them A number of your ordinarie sinnes are not damnable you neede not faith in Christs bloud to purge them nor repentance to bewaile them nor care and endeuour to preuent them who seeth not that our doctrine pulleth in and theirs letteth out the reynes of libertie to our corrupt nature for when a man beleeueth that he may do many things which are in deed transgressions of Gods lawe without offence to God or hurt to his neighbour or wounding of his owne conscience and that after he hath committed them he needeth not greatly to repent of them or to be sorry for them but that they are done away by saying a Lords prayer or hearing a Masse or creeping to a Crosse or receiuing a little Holy water what neede he make any conscience of these so sleight trifles nay how can hee choose but neglect and make light account of them This is one of the deuils subtile deuices or iuggling trickes which Saint Paul speaketh of where with hee laboureth to seduce simple soules for either hee will aggrauate our sinnes to driue vs to desperation or extenuate and excuse them to draw to presumption the rocke and gulfe whereat many thousand soules suffer shipwracke And this last the most dangerous wherein the Papists shew themselues the deuils agents and factours by this their doctrine of veniall sinnes for what is this but to excuse sinne and to extenuate it and so to make men presume to commit those things which they esteeme of no greater moment 39. The truth of this will more clearely appeare if wee take a suruay a little of those particular sinnes which they account as veniall To sweare by the bloud of God or wounds or bodie of Christ is no blasphemie saith Cardinall Caietane if it be spoken in a brawle or in some perturbation of mind neither is it to be counted any more than a veniall sinne Againe formall cursing saith Gregorie de Valentia although in it owne kinde it be a mortall sinne yet it may be onely a veniall to wit in respect either of the smalnesse of the matter or the want of deliberation in the speaker and hereby saith he Parents cursing their children with bitter words and deuoting them to the deuill may often be excused from mortall sinne
is recorded how the Iewes of Hungarie tooke a Carpenters Son that was a Christian in despiâ—â—â—â— of Christ whom they esteemed no better then the Soone of a Carpenter and cut all the veines of his body and suckt out his bloud with quils and being apprehended and tortured they confessed that they could not bee without Christian bloud for therewithall they anoynted their Priests Yea they haue often poysoned the springs and by that meanes brought great plagues vpon Christian people and set on fire Cities and Townes to bring them to pouerty and misery Can there be greater enemies to Christ then these are for the poysoned arrowes of their malice are shut vp against him who is in heauen beyond their reach and therefore they fall downe vpon his members but the venome of them lighteth vpon their owne heads to their eternall confusion Who would now imitate these wretches in any thing especially in that wherein the cause of their enmity consisteth can they be of God that doe this or rather are they not the brood of that Serpent that hath beene euer a profest enemy to the seed of the woman This being so cleare and manifest I leaue the first proposition without any other guard or defence and come to the confirmation of the second wherein the pith of the argument confisteth 2. That the Religion of the Church of Rome is an apish imitation of Iudaisine and that in those things wherein it is most opposite to Christ may appeare if wee first consider wherin the opposition of the Iewish Religion consisteth and then secondly compare the Romish with the same The Iewes Religion is opposite to Christ in two respects principally first in retaining the old Ceremonies of Moses law which were shadowes of things to come and had their accomplishment in Christ for that which Paul saith concerning Circumcisiou is to be vnderstood of all other Ceremonies They which entangle themselues with that yoke of bondage vnder those impotent and beggerly rudiments are abolished from Christ and Christ doth profit them nothing And secondly in deuising a multitude of strange and new superstitions coyned in the mint of their Rabbinish conceits contrary not onely to the Gospell of Iesus Christ but euen to their owne law which Deutorologies of theirs our Sauiour condemneth Math. 15. 3. 6. when hee saith that they transgressed the Commaundement of God made it of no effect by their owne tradition Both these wayes shew they their enmity to Christ and Christian Religion and are thereby retained and encouraged in their errours 3. Now compare the Romish Religion with these Rabbinisticall conceits in both respects and it will appeare that one egge is not liker to another nor milke to milke then the Romish and Iewish superstition are to each other And touching the first to begin with the multitude of their ceremonies It is not vnknowne to any that know any thing in the booke of God that the Church of the Iewes was loaden with a heauie burden of ceremonies S. Paul saith that it was so heauie that neither they nor their fathers were able to beare it and therefore calleth the Ceremoniall law a yoke of bondage and those that were vnder that yoke children of the bondwoman and not of the free And the reasons why God did impose vpon them such a number of Ceremonies were iust and holy to wit first because the Church was then in the infancy and therefore needed to be vnder a Schoolemaster to instruct and as it were catechize it vnto Christ and therefore they were to be dealt withall as children vse to be with the guilded leaues and faire pictures of externall rites and to be fed with milke being not able to digest strong meates Secondly because by them they were as it were by visible representations informed both touching some great benesit past and receiued and touching the Messias to come and his Kingdome as also concerning godly conuersation required in their owne life for in the barke of euery legall ceremonie these three vitall spirits were contained And thirdly as it is well obserued by S. Chrysostome in regard of their infirmity and weakenesse who being lately come out of Egypt and there defiled themselues with idolatrie and superstition necessarily required sacrifices and ceremonies to be allowed vnto them lest they should fall backe againe to their Egyptian corruption wherefore Almighty God saith he so dealt with them as a Physician dealeth with his sicke patient who through the burning heat of his disease requireth a cup of cold water or else is ready to hang or kill himselfe there the Physician being constrained by necessity commands a viole of cold water prepared by himselfe to be brought vnto him but withall warnes him that he drinke not but out of that Viole So God granted sacrifices and ceremonies to the sickly Israelites but so that they should not vse any but those which hee appointed for them and that after the manner by him prescribed And this to be so hee proueth because the law of ceremonies was not giuen vntill the children of Israel had defiled themselues with the golden Calfe for the making whereof they were so madde bent as that they pulled off their Iewels eare-rings and rings from their bodies and gaue them for the framing of that Idoll and hee illustrateth the same in another place by another excellent similitude If a man saith hee haue a wife prone to incontinencie hee shutteth her vp in certaine places chambers setting about her a guard of seruants and attendants to keepe her from straying abroad and entertaining her louers So God dealt with the Church of the Iewes which he had married to himselfe in compassion and loue seeing it prone to Idolatry and superstition hee separated it from other Nations and shut it vp within the bounds of the land of Canaan and set about it a guard of Ceremonies and externall Rites which should be as it were Tutors vnto it vntill it were fully confirmed in faith and obedience Thus farre Chrysostome By all which wee see not onely that the Church of the Iewes was loaded with a bundle of ceremonies which were to endure till the comming of the Messias but also the reasons why the Lord imposed that burden vpon them 4. Now is the Church of Rome any whit behinde them in this No verily but farre before them for if we shall compare Moses Leuiticus with the Romish Missals wee shall finde that in number of ceremonies they farre exceede the Synagogue of the Iewes The Iewes had but two great Sacraments the Church of Rome haue seuen The Iewes but one ordinary Altar the Church of Rome tenne thousand euen as many as Churches and not onely so but often diuers Altars in one Church The Iewes offered many sacrifices but the Church of Rome exceede them in the number of their Masses tenne to one The Iewish Holy-dayes were few in comparison of the Romish for they had but their
a true reall sacrifice then which what can be more Iewish especially seeing all such Altars were abolished by the Crosse of Christ and there remaineth but one Altar in the Church Whereof they haue no power to eate which serue the Tabernacle to wit Christ as all the Fathers expound the place who is the onely true Altar and proper sacrifice of the new Testament True Altar I say and proper Sacrifice because the soule of euery iust man is called by them a metaphoricall Altar and their prayers good workes almes-deeds c. spirituall sacrifices And therefore Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen and Lactantius writing against the Pagans who obiected that Christians had no Altars nor sacrifices and therefore no religion answere That a iust and holy soule is a right holy Altar from which doe arise prayers as sweet incense and vpon which are offered vp to God iustice patience faith innocencie chastity and such other vâ—rtues And these are the onely Altars and Sacrifices now vpon earth for our true Altar and sacrifice is in heauen 7. Againe the Iewes had lampes continually burning in the Tabernacle and afterward in the Temple which were types of Christ who is the true light of the world and of the Apostles and Ministers of the Gospell who by their doctrine and preaching conuay this light from Christ the fountaine as it were by Conduits and Pipes to the illuminating of the whole world Quiâ— in candelabro saith Gregory nisi Redemptor humani gener is designatur Who is figured out by the candlesticke but the Redeemer of mankinde Hastile candelabro saith venerable Bede ipse qui est caput Ecclesiae debet intelligi By the shaft of the Candlesticke must be vnderstood hee that is the head of the Church And the sixe branches issuing out of the body of the Candlesticke what are they but the Apostles and Pastours of the Church saith Marbachius which as branches issue from Christ and make but one body with the shaft to signifie that they must conspire in preaching Christ alone and so vnited to each other by the bond of Concord Yet the Church of Rome retaine also this ceremonie for they haue multitude of Lampes and Candles in their Churches burning in the day time as if they would declare to the world that either they beleeue that Christ is not yet come or else that they haue not the cleare Sunne-shine of the Gospell amongst them but the dimme Candle-light of superstition Now that this Iewish ceremonie is vsed amongst them not onely experience sheweth in all places and their great solemne Candlemasle vpon the day of the purification of the blessed Virgin but also the decree of their owne Popes Gregory the first and Sabinian his successour the one of which appointed certaine Lands for the maintenance of Wax-candles and Lamps in Churches and the other ordained Vt accensae Lampades perpetuò in Ecclesys retinerentur That burning Lampes should be alwayes kept in their Churches And that they fetch their patternâ— from the Iewes Durand plainly acknowledgeth when he saith That the Church is enlightned by Gods commandement Whereupon it is read in Exodus Charge the children of Israel that they offer pure oyle of oliue that the Lamps may burne continually in the Tabernacle It is cleare then that this is a Iewish imitation at least if they had not rather bee counted to be followers of the Gentiles then of the Iewes amongst whom also this custome was in vse to haue lights and Lampes continually burning in their Idoll Temples as witnesse both Tertullian Lactantius Gregory Naezianzene with diuers others Lactantius saith plainly That they set vp lights to their God as if he dwelt in darknesse And so they did for their gods whom they worshipped were deuils who are reserued in the chaines of darknesse vnto the Iudgement of the great day But our God dwelleth in light inaccessible and he is all light and in him is no darknesse what neede any light or Lamps be set vp before him then If they say that they haue the example of the primitiue Church for their warrant I answere that it is true indeede as may appeare out of all Ecclesiasticall Histories and the Epistles of Plinie the second to Traiane that they had the vse of Lamps in their assemblies but this was in their night-meetings which they were constrained to vse in the time of persecution not daring to assemble together by day as is testified both by Eusebius Epiphanius Tertullian c. but neuer in the day time till Ieromes age when this superstition began to grow vpon the Church So that this custome is either Heathenish or Iewish let them chuse whether both which are equally disgracefull to the Church of Christ 8. So likewise they fetch the vse of their hallowed water from the Iewes if not from the Pagans for the Iewes had their Holy-water made of the ashes of a red Cow whereby were purged all legall vncleannesses so haue the Romanists their Holy-water sprinkles to purge and clense away all the impurities of the soule This is plaine not onely by their practice but also by the decree falsly fathered vpon Pope Alexander the first but indeede of some later Pope which thus speaketh We blesse water mingled with salt that all being sprinkled therewith may be sanctified and purified which wee enioyne all Priests to doe for if the ashes of a Cow being sprinkled did sanctifie and clense the people of the Iewes then much more doth water mixed with salt and consecrated by diuine prayers sanctifie and clense Christian people Which consequence how vaine and impious it is who seeth not Vaine I say for the Leuiticall Holy-water did onely clense from outward vncleannesses but the Romish by their doctrine doth purge the soule from spirituall pollutions Impious for the Scripture saith that it is the bloud of Christ that purgeth vs from all our sinnes and not water mingled with salt and it maketh the comparison not betwixt the ashes of an Heyser and Holy-water water but betwixt it and the bloud of Christ This imitation then is both vaine and impious if it bee of the Iewes and more if it be of the Gentiles for what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols And yet so it is also for Iustine Martyr telleth vs that the deuils when they heard out of the Prophets of the spirituall washing that should be in the Kingdome of Christ in an apish resemblance caused his worshippers to purge themselues by the sprinkling of hallowed water And Theodoret that Iulian the Apostate commanded their bread flesh fruits and all other kind of victuals to be purged as he supposed by holy-water and that Valentinian his Tribune who succeeded him in the Empire when Fortunes Priest sprinkled him with holy-water strooke the Priest with his fist saying Thou hast not clensed but defiled me Hipocrates also the Physician doth witnesse the same when he saith
confesse afterward that it is indeed a rule but not a total and entire rule but a partiall and imperfect one If it bee any waies a rule then it was giuen by God and written by the men of God to that end to be the rule And so Bellarmines goodly reasons hang together like a sicke mans dreame the one part wherof ouerthroweth the other 18. But to answere in particular to them seuerally To the first I say that it is not farre from blasphemy to affirme that there is any thing in holy Scripture that is vnnecessary for though all things are not of equall necessity and profit yet there is nothing in the whole Booke of God from the beginning of Gen. to the end of the Reuel but may haue most profitable and necessary vse in the Church of God if not for the essentiall forme of faith yet for the adorning and beautifying of it and this may truely bee verified euen of those things which he excepteth against to wit the Histories of the Olde and New Testament and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles out of all which how many excellent doctrines may be deriued both for the confirmation of faith and edification of manners And therefore as in mans body God by nature hath not disposed all parts to be alike necessary but some haue no other vse but ornament and comelinesse so hath Almighty God mingled the parts of holy Scripture in that manner that some are as it were bones and sinews to our faith some flesh and bloud and some againe but exteriour beautie and fashion yet as in nature nothing is made in vaine so much lesse in Scripture is there any thing to be accounted superfluous and redundant nay in this diuine body there are no excrements that may be cast out and separated as it fareth in our earthly carkases but all is entire sound and perfect as the Prophet Dauid teacheth Psal 19. 7. when hee saith that the Law of God is perfect conuerting the soule and our Sauiour Math. 5. 18. when he auoucheth that till heauen and earth perish one iote or title of the Law shall not c. 19. To his second reason I answere three things first that it is entirely false that the Scripture doth not contayne all things necessarily required to the Essence of faith for if the Scripture be perfect and giueth wisedome to the simple if nothing may bee added to it nor taken from it if to teach any thing besides the Scripture deserueth the fearefull Anathema if it be able to make the man of God perfect to euery good worke if in them onely wee may finde eternall life if the Church of God be built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and lastly if our faith and hope doe arise from the Scriptures then there is nothing necessary to saluation but is fully and plenarily contained in them but the first is true as appeareth by all those testimonies before alledged and therefore the latter must by necessary consequence be true also 20. Secondly I answere that Bellarmine by that assertion crosseth the whole streame of the Fathers for most of them affirme the flat contrary Tertullian saith that when we once beleeue the Gospell Hoc prius credimus non esse quod vltra credere debemus This we beleeue first that there is nothing besides which we ought to beleeue Iraeneus saith that the Apostles committed to writing the Gospell which they preached Fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum To be the foundation and pillar of our faith Basil saith Quicquid extra diuinam scripturam est cum ex fide non sit peccatum est Whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture because it is not of faith is sinne Cyrill saith that all those things were written in holy Scripture which the Writers thought sufficient Tam ad mores quà m ad dogmata As well touching conuersation as doctrine Augustine saith that those things were chosen out to be written Quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Which seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue And againe he saith in another place Whether concerning Christ or concerning the Church of Christ or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith or life we will not say if we but if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospell let him be accursed Chrysostome saith Si quis eorum If any of them who are said to haue the holy Ghost doe speake any thing of him selfe and not out of the Gospell beleeue it not Ierome speaking of an opinion touching the death of Zacharias the father of Iohn Baptist saith Hoc quia ex Scripturis non habet authoritatem This because it hath not authority out of the Scriptures is as easily contemned as approued I supersede for breuity sake the residue of the Fathers who with full consent conspire in the same opinion yea not onely the Fathers but many also of their owne most learned Authors as Thomas Aquinas Antoninus Durandus Peresius Clingius and diuers others by all which we may see how little reckoning Bellarmine maketh of the ancient Fathers where they make for him hee magnifieth and exalteth them to the skies but when they are opposite to him he reiecteth them as drosse and the like account he maketh of his owne Doctors 21. Lastly I answere that of those things which he affirmeth not to be contayned in holy Scripture and yet to be of necessity of beliefe some of them are farre from either necessity or profit as that of the meanes whereby women vnder the Law were purged from originall sinne and how the Gentiles were partakers of the couenant hauing not the Sacrament and that Easter is to be celebrated vpon the Lords day If these things be of that necessity of beliefe which hee maketh them how many thousand then haue sinned greatly in being ignorant thereof for at this day not the hundreth part of Christians euer heard these things once named and yet by this ignorance they neither offended God nor hindered their owne saluation And what shall we thinke of Iraeneus and other godly Bishops in the East that held that Easter was not to bee celebrated euer vpon the Lords day Againe the other things nominated by him as that the books of the sacred Bible are the Canonicall Scripture and the word of the liuing God that the children of beleeuing parents are to be baptized that Christ descended into hell may easily be proued out of Scripture either by expresse testimonie or by necessarie consequence and deduction which is all one for Perinde sunt â—a quae ex Scripturis colliguntur atqueâ—a quae scribuntur c. saith Nazianzene 22. Thirdly being driuen by the power of truth to acknowledge the Scripture to be a rule he commeth in with a leaden distinction to wit that is not a totall but
sacrifice for him by saying Masse Who can doubt of Purgatory that is thus authentically proued The second place is in the 8. Psalme 7. Thou hast put all things vnder his feete fowles of the ayre that is say they the Angels in heauen beasts of the field that is the godly in this life and fish of the Sea that is the soules in Purgatory Here is a proofe of Purgatory worthy the noting 28. And thus much for a taste of their false and foolish expositions these being not the hundreth part of them which are found in their writings Let all men iudge now whether these men deale well with the Scriptures or no and whether they be friends or enemies to the sacred word of God the Spirit of God that animateth it that dare thus wretchedly abuse it at their pleasures and wring it like a nose of waxe into any shape to make it serue their purpose Erasmus placeth that Frier in the Ship of fooles that being asked what Text he had in the Scripture for the putting of Heretikes to death produced that of S. Paul Tit. 3. 10. Haereticum hominem post vnam aut alteram admonitionem deuita that is in true construing Shunne an Heretike after the first or second admonition but he construed it thus De vita supple tolle that is Kill an Heretike after c. This fellow by Erasmus opinion was worthy of a Garland or rather of a Cockscomb for his witty exposition and so was he also that being asked where hee found the Virgin Mary in the olde Testament answered In the first of Genesis in this Text Deus vocauit congregationem aquarum Maria. But I must not be so sawcy with Popes and Cardinalls I iudge them not therefore but leaue them to the iudgement of God 29. Their last practice against the Scriptures is their adding to and detracting from it at their pleasure whatsoeuer either distasteth their Pallate or may seeme to make for their profit which notwithstanding hath a wo denounced against it And this practice is grounded vpon a rule Papa potest tollere ius diuinum ex parte non in totum The Pope may take away say they the lawe of God in part but not in whole and if hee may take away then may he adde also for the same reason is of both and one is as lawfull as the other for adding marke their practice the Councill of Trent together with most of the Popish Doctours adde vnto the Canon of the Scripture the Apocrypha Bookes of Iudith Wisedome Tobias Ecclesiasticus Machabees remainders of Ester and Daniel and curse all them that are not of the same minde and yet the Iewes before Christ who were the onely Church of God at that time and Scriniarij Christianorum as Tertullian calls them or depositarij custodes eloquiorum Dei as Tollet the Iesuite names them that is The keepers and treasurers of the holy Scriptures and to whome were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 3. 2. These Iewes I say neuer admitted of these Books as Canonical and the Fathers for the most part though they held them Bookes profitable for instruction of manners yet dispunged them out of the Canon as not of sufficient authority to proue any poynts of faith as is confessed by Bellarmine himselfe in some sort naming Epiphanius Hilarius Ruffinus and Hierom and by Melchior Canus nominating besides the former Melito Origen Damascene Athanasius accompanied with many other Diuines as he saith and besides the Bookes themselues by many pregnant proofes deriued out of their owne sides doe be wray that they are not of the same spirit the Canonicall Scripture is of 30. Againe they adde to the Scriptures theiâ— Decretals and Traditions Innocentius the third commanded the Canon of the Masse to be held equall to the words of the Gospell and it is in one of their Bookes Inter Canonicas Scripturas decretales Epistolae connumerantur that is The Decretall Epistles are numbred among these Canonicall Scriptures As for Traditions I haue shewed before that it is a decree of the Councill of Trent that they are to be receiued with as great affection of piety and reuerence as the written Word of God Againe they adde vnto the Scripture when they take vpon them to make new articles of faith which haue no ground nor footing in the Scriptures for vnto the twelue articles of the Apostles Creed the Councill of Trent addeth twelue more as may appeare in the Bull of Pius the fourth in that publike profession of the Orthodoxall faith vniformely to be obserued and professed of all And when they adde vnto the two Sacraments ordained by Christ fiue other deuised in the forge of their owne braines and those two also they so sophisticate with their idle and braine-sicke Ceremonies as the Eucharist with eleuation adoration circumgostation and such like trumperie and Baptisme with oyle and spittle and salt and coniuring and crossing c. that they make them rather Pageants to mooue gazing then Sacraments for edifying and thus most wrongfully they adde vnto the Scripture euen what they themselues list 31. As for their detracting and taking away they shew themselues no lesse impudent for they haue taken away the second Commandement as appeareth in diuers of their Catechismes and Masse-bookes because it cutteth the throat of their Idolatry wholly out of the Decalogue and to make vp the number of tenne they diuide the last Commandement into two contrary to all reason and authority Yea so impudent are they that two famous Iesuites Vasques and Azorius doe boldy affirme that this second precept which forbiddeth worshipping of Images was not of the law of nature but onely a positiue Ceremoniall and Temporall Iniunction which was to cease in the time of the Gospell and in the Eucharist whereas Christ ordained the Sacrament of his bodie and bloud in two kindes they notwithstanding depriue the people of the cup and will haue it administred to them but in one kind Yea Cardinall Caietane as Catharinus testifieth of him cut off from the Scripture the last Chapter of S. Marks Gospell some parcels of Saint Luke the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of Iames the second Epistle of Peter the second and third of Iohn and the Epistle of Iude and yet this mans writings were not disallowed in the church as containing any thing contrary to wholesome doctrine and hee himselfe acknowledged to bee an incomparable Diuine and the learnedst of all his age and thus wee see both the doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome against the Scripture 32. To the which if we adde their open blasphemies and horrible reproches wherewith in plaine downe-right blowes they rent and teare in pieces or at least-wise besmeare and defile these holy writings then their malice against them will bee knowne to all men and there will bee no vizard left to maske it withall To conclude therefore some of them
to some puritie doth approoue and confirme all these grosse opinions of the Schoole Diuines for thus it decreeth that it is good and profitable humbly to inuocate the Saints and to fly to their prayers and succour for the obtayning of blessing from God in Christ And that wee may see the meaning of this Decree the Romane Catechisme which was made by the commaundement of the Bishop of Rome doth more expressely affirme that the Saints are therefore to be called vpon because they pray continually for the saluation of men and God bestoweth many benefits vpon vs for their merit and grace sake and that they obtaine pardon for our sinnes and reconcile vs into the fauour of God And for the refining Iesuites they haue not yet refined this errour for Coster writeth that the Saints are to be inuocated both that they may mediate our cause to God and also that themselues may helpe vs. Viega another Iesuite saith that they are as it were the dores by which an entrance is opened to vs vnto the most holy places in heauen Osorius another of the same stampe affirmeth that God giueth vs all good things by the intercession of the Saints And lastly to make vp the messe Bellarmine himselfe that is more wary then all the rest doth not blush to say that Gods predestination is helped supported by the prayers of the Saints because God hath determined to vse their prayers for the effecting of mans saluation Behold here a Map of the Romish doctrine Who can now choose but account them Idolaters when they thus teach the people That all blessings descend vpon them by the meanes of the Saints and so encourage them to repose their confidence in their merits 69. But from their doctrine let vs come to the practice of their Church and we shall see this more cleerely and heere some few examples shall serue for a taste for to propound all in this kinde would bee both tedious and needlesse Thus therefore in their publike Seruice Bookes Rosaries and Breuiaries they pray vnto the Saints To Saint Paul Vouchsafe to bring thy humble suppliants to heauen after the end of this life to whom thou hast reuealed the light of truth To Saint Iames the greater Haile ô singular safeguard of thy pilgrims bountifully heare the prayers of thy seruants helpe them that worship thee and bring them to heauen To Saint Thomas thus Vouchsafe to establish vs thy suppliants in his faith by handling of whoÌ„ thou deseruedst to acknowledge to be God To Saint Iohn Haile ô holy Apostle of our Lord Iesus Christ I intreat thee by his loue who chose thee out of the world that thou wouldest deliuer me thy vnworthy seruant from all aduersitie and from all impediments of body and soule and receiuing my soule at the houre of death wouldest bring me to life euerlasting To Saint George thus Hee saue vs from our sinnes that wee may rest with the blessed in heauen Here Saint George is made a Sauiour and that from sinne and so either Christ is cleere put out of his office or George ioyned with him in his office Againe to Saint Erasmus Graunt that by thy merits and prayers we may ouercome all the snares of our enemies and be freed from the pouerty of body and minde and from eternall death To Saint Christopher O glorious Martyr Christopher bee mindefull of vs to God and without delay defend our body sense and honor thou that deseruedst to carry in thine armes ouer the Sea the Flower of heauen cause vs to auoid all wickednesse and to loue God with all our hearts To Saint Cosmus and Damianus O most holy Physicians who shine in heauen most cleerely by your merits preserue vs both from bodily plague and disease and also from the death of the soule that we may liue in grace vntill we enter into heauen To Francis the Fryer thus O Francis sunnes light singular crucified Saint c. beâ— thou to vs the way of life make satisfaction for vs alway shew to Christ the marks of thy wounds This Frier Francis they make equall to Christ and therefore they say that Christ imprinted his fiue wounds vpon him as if he also were to suffer for the world and redeeme mankind and that they were alike in all things as those blasphemous Verses of two shamelesse Iesuites Turselline and Bencius doe declare 70. What should I trouble thee gentle Reader with any more of this trumpery their Bookes are full of such-like prayers if any please to read them and that we may plainely see that they put their trust and confidence in them not onely the words doe sufficiently signifie but also the liberall indulgences their Popes haue annexed to the deuout sayings of such Orisons As Pope Sixtus hath promised eleuen thousand yeeres pardon to them that shall say a certaine prayer before the Image of the Virgine Mary beginning thus Aue sancta Mater Dei c. But to leaue the rest of the Saints and to come to the blessed Virgine whom with Epiphanius we blesse and honour but in â—â— casâ— worship it is a wonder into what an abominable Idoll they haue translated not her for shee abhorres their impietie but the Idea and fancy of her which they haue deuised in their owne braynes for they call her the Queene of heauen the Mother of mercy the Gate of Paradise the Life and hope of a sinner the Light of the Church the Lady of the world the Aduocatresse and Mediatrix of mankinde yea they say that the death and passion of Christ and the holy Virgine was for the redemption of mankinde and that she also must come betwixt God and vs for the remission of sinne and that her Sonne and she redeemed the world with one heart as Adam and Eue sold the world for one apple And thus they ioyne the Virgine Mary with Christ in the office of our redemption and so make her equall with him which were somewhat tolerable if they could stay there but they climbe higher in impudency and not onely match her with Christ but set her aboue him For they tell vs of a vision How Christ preparing to iudge the world there were two Ladders set that reached to heauen the one red at the top whereof Christ sate the other white at the top whereof the Virgine Mary sate and when the Friers could not get vp by the red Ladder of Christ but euermore fell downe Saint Francis called them to the white Ladder of our Lady and there they were receiued And a late Iesuite hath set forth to the view of the world certaine Verses wherein he preferres the milke of our Lady in many respects before the bloud of Christ yea they subiect Christ now raigning in the heauens to his Mothers command as it is sung in some of their Churches O happy Virgine that our sinnes dost purge Eâ—treate thy Mother and thy Sonne doe
vrge Command him though Redeemer that â—e be By right of Motherhood which is giuen to thee 71. And this the Rosarie of the Virgine Mary doth more euidently manifest for Dominicke who was the first inuentor of it ordayned that fiftie Ane Maries should be recited and at euery tenth one Pater noster which together make a Rosarie and for this purpose the same Dominicke framed fiue and fiftie Stones or Beades and hung them together on a string betwixt euery ten little ones one great one and called them Patriloquia as it were prayers to the Father which he might more properly haue called Matriloquia prayers to the Mother for here are ten Aues to each Pater noster And this was the originall of praying vpon Beads Now out of these Rosaries sprung there Mary Psalters for three Rosaries to wit an hundred and fifty Aue Maries and fifteene Pater nosters make one Mary Psalter because forsooth the Psalter of Dauid consists of so many Psalmes and to the fraternitie of this Psalter and the sayers thereof were giuen by diuers Popes as Sixtus the fourth and Innocent the eighth threescore thousand yeeres of indulgence and plenary remission both from the punishment and fault one in the time of life and one in the houre of death Is not heere I pray you the worship of the Virgine Mary exalted aboue the worship of Christ who can doubt of it seeing the proportion is ten to one fifty to fiue an hundred to ten an hundred and fifty to fifteene And no maruell if it bee thus in their prayers seeing it is as euill or worse in their deeds for whereas wee haue one Church or religious house dedicated to Christ we shall finde ten dedicated to Mary the Mother of Christ and so the Mother is aduanced aboue the Sonne and yet she but a woman of flesh and bloud saued by her Sonne and blessed by that faith which shee had in him and hee the Sonne of God as well as the Sonne of Man the Sauiour and Redeemer of mankinde 72. But the most horrible Idolatrie and blasphemy of all the rest is to be found in another Mary Psalter of theirs compiled as they say by Bonauenture and authorised in the Church of Rome wherein they apply all the whole Psalter of Dauid to the Virgine Mary and wheresoeuer they finde the name Dominus Lord they put in Domina Lady as for example in the third Psalme for Lord how are my foes increast they say Lady how are my foes increast and in the sixt Psalme for O Lord correct mee not in thy wrath they say O Lady correct me not in thy wrath And in the 31. Psalme for Blessed are they O Lord whose sinnes are forgiuen they say Blessed are they whose hearts loue thee O Virgine Mary for their sinnes shall be forgiuen them by thee and so cleane through the Psalter If any desire to see the gulfe and dunghill of Superstition and Idolatrie practised in the Church of Rome vnder the Inuocation of Saints let him but read this one Psalter which alone if there were no other argument is sufficient to conuince their whole Church of open and notorious Idolatrie and that Cassander himselfe confesseth in the place aboue quoted 73. Thus they exalt the Virgine Mary aboue Christ and equall her with God yea which is horrible to speake and fearefull to be recorded they place her aboue God himselfe for they teach that a man may appeale to the Virgine Mary not onely from a Tyrant and from the Diuell but euen from God himselfe This writeth Bernardine de Busto about 120. yeeres since and his booke was authorised by Pope Alexander the sixt and yet remaines so farre from all disallowance that it is approoued by Posseuine as a learned and godly booke Out of which it must needes follow which I tremble to vtter that by their doctrine the Virgine Mary is greater then God because euery appeale is from the lesser to the greater 74. But no maruell if they preferre Mary to Christ that is the Mother before the Sonne seeing they doe as much to two Fryers Francis and Dominicke He that would see how Francis is matched and exalted aboue Christ let him read the booke of his Conformities and hee will bee astonished at their madnesse Also of Dominicke they write most strange things and such as Christ neuer did the like as for example Christ raysed but three dead saith Antoninus but Dominicke raysed three at Rome and forty that were drowned in a Riuer neere to Tholosse Christ being made immortall after his resurrection entred twice into the house the dores being shut but Dominicke being a mortall man entred into a Church in the night the dores being shut that he might not waken the brethren Christ had all power committed vnto him in heauen and earth and Dominicke did partake the same power with him for the Angels serued him the Elements obeyed him the Diuels trembled at him Christ was the Lord absolutely and by authority but Dominicke principally and by possession Christ was laid at his birth in a Manger and wrapped in clouts to keepe him from cold but Dominicke being an infant would often get out of his bed and as if hee abhorred all delights of the flesh lye vpon the bare ground Christ neuer prayed but hee was heard if he would except in the Garden when hee prayed that the Cup might passe away from him where praying according to his sensuall part would not be heard according to reason but Dominicke neuer desired any thing of God but it was graunted vnto him Christ being borne a Starre appeared in the East which directed the Wise-men to him and foreshewed that he should be the light of the world but Dominicke being borne and ready to bee baptized his Godmother saw a Starre in his forehead foretelling a new light of the world Lastly Christ loued vs and washed away our sinnes by his bloud so did Dominicke for hee whipt himselfe thrice euery day with an Iron chayne and drew bloud each time out of his sides once for his owne sinnes which were very small the second for those that were in Purgatory and the third for those that liue in the world Is not Dominicke heere in some things equalled and in others preferred before our blessed Sauiour Iesus Christ 75. And thus to passe ouer all their false and counterfeit Saints which eyther neuer were in rerum natura or were not such as they make them as Christopher George Catherine and such like For it is a true saying of Augustine or of some other Multorum corpora honorantur in terris quorum animae torquentur in inferno The bodies of many are honoured on earth whose soules are tormented in hell And to omit that the Pope may erre in the canonizing of Saints it being grounded vpon false miracles as Caietane acknowledgeth and others though Bellarmine be of another minde and laboureth to prooue the contrary but God wot with
in Christ is not taken away by their vnion in one person but the proprietie of each nature is kept safe Leo one of their Popes Christ hath vnited both natures together by such a league that neither glorification doth consume the inferiour nature nor assumption doth diminish the superiour To these I might adde many more but these are sufficient to prooue that this doctrine touching the truth of Christs humanitie now glorified in the heauens that he hath retained our nature with all the proprieties sinne onely and infirmities excepted is concordant both with holy Scripture and with the voited opinions of all reuerend antiquitie 12. Now this doctrine is crossed and contradicted by that other doctrine of theirs touching Transubstantiation and the carnall and corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament for this they teach that the body of Christ is in the Sacrament with the whole magnitude thereof together with a true order and disposition of parts flesh bloud and bone as he was borne liued crucified rose againe and yet they say that the same body in the Eucharist though it hath magnitude and extention and disposition of parts agreeable to the forme of an humane body neuerthelesse doth not fill a place neither is to bee extended nor proportioned to the place which it possesseth here be pregnant and manifest contradictions Christ hath one body and yet many bodies euen as many as there are consecrated hoasts in the world that is it may be a thousand bodies at once and so his body is one and not one at the same time Againe this body is in heauen in a place and the same body at the same instant is on the Altar without being compassed about with place to be in heauen and to be in earth at one instant are contradictory propositions being vnderstoode of finite substances and not of that infinite essence which filleth all places for they imply thus much to be in heauen and net to be in heauen to be in earth and not to be in earth which be the rules of Logicke and Reason the mother of Logicke cannot be together true Againe at one moment of time to be aboue and yet below to bee remooued farre off and yet bee neere adioyning to come to one place and yet not to depart from another are so meerely opposite to each other that they cannot be reconciled And lastly a body to haue forme magnitude extention and disposition of parts and yet not with these to fill a place is as much as to say it is a body and yet not a bodie it is in a place and yet not in that very same place these are contradictions so euident that it is impossible for the wit of man to reconcile them 13. Notwithstanding the aduocates of the Romish Synagogue labour might and maine in this taske and by many arguments endeauour to reunite these oppositions first by Gods omnipotency secondly by the qualities of a glorified body and thirdly by arguments from the discourse of reason From hence they thus argue All things are possible to God and therefore this is possible neither is there any thing excepted from the omnipotency of God saue these things Quae facere non est facere sed deficere as Bellarmine speaketh that is which to doe is not to doe but to vndoe and doe argue rather impotency then potency of which sort that one body should be in many places at once is not saith he because it is not in expresse words excepted in Scripture as to lye and to denye himselfe are To this I answere first that albeit the Scripture doth not expresly except this from Gods omnipotency to make one body to bee in two places at once yet implyedly it doth for it denyeth power or rather weaknesse to God to doe those things which imply contradiction of which kinde this is for one body to be in many places at once And Bellarmine himselfe saith that this is a first principle in the light of nature euery thing is or is not which being taken away all knowledge faileth Secondly I answere that the power of God is not so much to be considered as his will nor what he can doe but what he hath reucaled in his word that hee will doe for if wee argue from his power to the effect Wee may deuise God saith Tertullian to doe any thing because he could doe it And therefore the same Authour saith Dei posse velle est Dei nonposse nolle God can of stones raise vp Children vnto Abraham saith Iohn Baptist Now if any should hence conclude that any of Abrahams children were made of stones in a proper speech all would thinke him to haue no more wit then a stone And to this accordeth Theodoret when hee saith That God can doe all things which hee will but God will not doe any of these things which are not agreeable to his nature But for to make a body to be without quantity and a quantity to be without dimension and dimension without a place that is as much to say a body without a body and quantity without quantity and a place without a place is contrary to Gods nature and therefore cannot bee agreeable to his will and so hath no correspondence with his power And lastly I answere that it is no good reason to say God can doe such a thing therefore he doth it but rather thus God will doe such a thing therefore he can doe it and thus the Scripture teacheth vs to reason Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord that did hee in heauen and in earth and not whatsoeuer hee could doe but whatsouer it pleased him to do and the Leper said to our Sauiour Christ Master if thou wilt thou canst make me cleane no◠if thou canst thou wilt but if thou wilt thou canst 14. Secondly whereas they obiect that Christs bodie after his glorification is indued with more excellent qualities then any other naturall body by reason of that super-excellent glory wherewith it is adorned aboue all others and thereby as he came to his Apostles the dores being shut and rose out of his graue notwithstanding the stone that lay vpō it and appeared vnto Paul on earth being at the same time in heauen so he is in the Eucharist after a strange and miraculous manner and yet is in heauen at the same time I answere first with Theodoret that Christs bodie is not changed by his glorification into another nature but remaineth a true bodie filled with diuine glory And with Augustine that Christ gaue vnto his flesh immortality but tooke not away nature and in another place That though Christ had a spirituall body after his resurrection yet it was a true bodie because he said to his Disciples Palpate videte feele and see and as his body was then after his resurrection so it is now being in the heauens Secondly that when hee came out of the graue the Angell remoued the stone
that is falshood to falshood now in this my taske is to demonstrate how it crosseth the word of God that is falshood to truth which being proued I hope no man which is not drunke with the poisonous cuppe of the whoore of Babylons fornication will doubt of the vanity and falshood thereof Now my purpose is not to enter into the lists of disputation and confute their opinions by strength of argument that combate hath beene valiantly performed by many of our Champions onely my intent is first to shew how their doctrines coÌ„tradict the plain text of Gods word and secondly to wipe away their subtle and intricate distinctions whereby they labour to make a reconciliation betwixt the word of God and their opinions which shall be my onely taske in this Chapter for it is to bee noted that there was neuer any generation so happie or rather so miserable in distinctions as the Romanists are they maintain their kingdomes by distinctions by them they blind the eyes of the simple dazle the vnderstanding of the vnaduised set a glose vpon their counterfeit ware couer the deformity of their Apostate Church and lastly extinguish the truth or at leastwise so darken and obscure it that it cannot shine so brightly as it would but in seeking to extinguish the light of truth they distinguish themselues from the trueth and as Iacob by his party-coloured stickes occasioned a brood of party-coloured sheepe and goates so they by their fond distinctions bring foorth a party-coloured and counterfeit Religion as I trust to lay open to the world in this discourse following 2. The maior or first proposition beeing without all controuersie I passe ouer in silence and come to the minor or second proposition which is that the Religion of the Church of Rome in many doctrines is apparently opposite to the word of God 3. The Gospell teacheth that 〈◊〉 one onely God is to bee inuocated and worshipped and that after that manner which he hath appointed in his word and that all the confidence of our saluation is to bee placed in him alone but the Romanists command not onely to inuocate God but also Angels and Saints departed and in time of danger to expect helpe and succour from them and to repose our trust and confidence in them also 4. Bellarmine distinguisheth and saith that God alone indeed is to be worshipped and inuocated with that kinde of adoration which is due onely vnto God but yet the excellent creatures may bee honoured and some of them inuocated not as gods but as such as are Gods friends that is with an inferiour kinde of worship 5. But these distinctions cannot extinguish the truth for first they giue by name the highest worship that can bee to wit Latria to the Image and reliques of Christ and the crosse and to a piece of bread in the Sacrament insomuch that Gregory de Valentia a famous Iesuite and Bellarmines compeere is in this regard driuen to say that some kinde of Idolatrie is lawfull Secondly if they should deny this yet their doctrine and practice doth apparently proclaime asmuch for when they say to their Agnus deis It breaketh and quasheth all sinne as Christs bloud doe they not equall them to Christ when they place their hope and confidence in Saints and reliques doe they not equall them to God when they pray that by the merit of a golden siluer or woodden crosse they may be freed from sinne committed doe they not equall it with our Sauiour that dyed on the crosse when they desire at the Saints hands grace and glory doe they not equall them to the God of grace and glory when they call the blessed Virgine the Queene of Heauen and giue vnto her one halfe of Gods kingdome euen the halfe of mercy doe they not equall her to her maker Lastly when they offer sacrifice to reliques and Images as namely burne frankincense set vp tapers offer the calues of their lippes doe they not equall them to God for all these dueties are proper and peculiar parts of Gods seruice and therefore in attributing them to creatures they giue vnto them plainely that seruice and worship which belongeth to God alone 6. The Gospell teacheth that remission of sinnes and euerlasting life is bestowed vpon vs freely not for any works or merits sake of our owne but for Iesus Christs sake the only begotten Sonne of God who was crucified for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification But the Romanists teach that wee are iustified and saued not by Christs merits onely but in part for Christs sake and in part for our owne contrition obedience and good works 7. Bellarmine answereth that their doctrine is falsely charged to say that sinners are iustified partly for their owne works sake and partly by Christ for saith hee by a distinction there bee three kinde of works one of those that are performed by the strength of nature onely without faith and the grace of God another of such as proceede from faith and grace but not from a man fully iustified and therefore are called works of Preparation as Prayer Almes Fasting Sorrow for sinne and such like and the third of such which are done by a man iustified and proceede from the Spirit of God dwelling in his heart and sheading abroad charity in the same Now concerning the first hee acknowledgeth that we are not iustified by them by the example of Abraham Rom. 4. and therefore that they most impudently belye their doctrine that fasten this opinion vpon them As touching the second he saith that these works Preparatiue are not meritorious of reconciliation and iustification by condignity and iustice yet in as much as they proceede from faith and grace they merite after a sort that is obtaine remission of sinnes The third sort of works hee boldly and confidently affirmeth to merite not remission of sinnes because that was obtayned before but euerlasting glory and happinesse and that truely and properly 8. This Bellarminian distinction may be distinguished by two essentiall qualities first Folly secondly Falsehood Folly for it maketh nothing to the taking away of the Antithesis before mentioned for when as he confesseth that the second kinde of works doe merite remission of sinnes after a sort and the third eternall life absolutely what doth â—e but acknowledge that which wee charge them withall and which himselfe reiected a little before as a slaunder namely that wee are iustified and saued partly by our owne merits and partly by the merits of Christ for the Gospell saith We are saued by Christs merits alone and he saith We are saued by our owne merits also And thus the folly and vanity of his distinction euidently appeareth 9. The falsehood sheweth it selfe in two things first in that hee affirmeth that they doe not teach that works done before grace doe merite any thing at Gods hand for though it be a Canon of the Councill of Trent charged with an Anathema If any
that the Spirit of God witnesseth vnto our spirits that wee are the sonnes of God Neither is this witnesse of the Spirit a doubtfull and vncertaine certificate for Saint Paul in the words going before calleth it the Spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father and not the spirit of bondage to feare any more When therefore God doth shead abroad his Spirit into our hearts crying and making vs to cry Abba Father in faithfull not formall prayer that is a certaine testimony to our spirits that we are the sonnes of God For as Saint Ierome well noteth Wee neuer durst call God our Father but vpon conscience of the Spirit dwelling in vs. Neither doe we euer vpon this ground call God our Father but withall we are or ought to be perswaded that we are his children 15. Againe why doth hee say in another place that all they which beleeue the Gospell are sealed with the holy Spirit of promise Are Gods children sealed and can they not see nor know the Seale Is not this one vse of a seale to confirme a couenant assuring the certainty of the performance thereof to him to whom it is made Yea doth not Saint Iohn say Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in vs because he hath giuen vs of his Spirit And againe doth not the holy Ghost so ascribe this knowledge of iustification and saluation on to a mans selfe that he denyeth it to all others To him that ouercommeth I will giue a white stone and in the stone a new name written which no man knoweth saâ—â— he that receiueth it What is this white stone but the absolution and remission of a sinner what is the new name written in it but the childe of God This no man knoweth but he that hath it therefore he that hath it knoweth it What can be more plaine And yet this is the exposition almost of all Diuines vpon that place To omit all other testimonies doth not the Scripture now teach this doctrine touching the certainty of saluation 16. I but saith Bellarmine all Gods promises for the most part are conditionall and no man can certainely know whether he hath performed the condition and therefore cannot assure himselfe of the promise To which I answere that albeit in regard of our infirmitie we are not able to fulfill the conditions required in Gods promises yet wee are assured that we shall fulfill them through him that strengthneth vs and so as the Apostle Paul said in one place Wee can doe nothing no not so much as thinke a good thought Yet in another place he saith I can doe all things through Christ that strengthneth me So may we say of our selues We cannot do anything of our selues yet in Christ Iesus wee can doe all things By his might wee can keepe his Commandements though not perfectly yet so as our defects are made vp by his perfection and our endeuours accepted in his mediation for his sake it is giuen vnto vs not onely to beleeue in him but also to suffer for him and by his neuer-fayling grace and euerlasting loue we are assured that we shall perseuere vnto the end And therefore Origen saith that it is impossible that that which God hath once quickned should either by himselfe or any other be killed Thus there is no condition required of the children of God but they are assured that they can performe it though not in full measure and by their owne strength yet in that measure which God will accept and by the strength of his Spirit which dwelleth in them and sanctifieth them to doe his will And thus this third Antithesis is nothing empeached by Bellarmines cauill 17. The Gospell telleth vs that there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world which is Christ Iesus the Sauiour of the world who offered vp himselfe once and no more for to take away the sinnes of his people But the Church of Rome teacheth that euery Masse is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quicke and the dead and that euery Priest as often as he saith Masse doth offer vp Christ vnto God the Father as a Sacrifice for sinne 18. Bellarmine here distinguisheth againe and saith that indeede there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world to wit that which was once offered vpon the Crosse but yet that one Sacrifice may be reiterated in mysterie by the same high Priest Christ Iesus by the hands of a carnall Priest And againe he in another place distinguisheth this Sacrifice into bloudy vnbloudy saith that there was but one bloudie Sacrifice of Christ and that on the Altar of the Crosse but there are many vnbloudy sacrifices of the same Christ in their dayly Masses And lastly that the sacrifice of the Masse is but an application of the Sacrifice of the Crosse vnto mens soules for the actuall remission of sinnes purchased by Christ vpon the Crosse 19. Here is much adoe to little purpose three distinctions and all not worth a rush for all of them are mutually contrary to each others and vaine and friuolous in themselues first if the sacrifice of the Masse bee a repetition of the sacrifice of the crosse then it is not an application of it for it is one thing to reiterate and another to apply and therefore if the Priest doth reiterate it then hee doth not apply it and if hee doth apply it then hee doth not reiterate for to reiterate is to doe againe that which was done before and to apply is to make vse of that which was done but not to doe it againe Beside if the masse bee a repetition and application of the sacrifice of the crosse then how is it an vnbloudy sacrifice can that bloudy sacrifice bee repeated and applied after an vnbloudy manner that is asmuch as to say it is a sacrifice and yet not a sacrifice especially no propitiatory sacrifice seeing as the Apostle speaketh without the shedding of bloud there is no remissioÌ„ of sinnes Againe if the masse be a repetition of that bloudy sacrifice of Christ on the crosse then it is a repetition of Christs death and a crucifying of him againe for the sacrifice of Christ and the death of Christ is all one and if it bee so then it must needs be bloudy aswell as that for the repetition of a thing is the doing of the same thing againe And lastly if it bee an application of it then it cannot bee a repetition of it nor indeed the same in specie with it for the application of a thing is not the thing it selfe in any reason and thus these distinctions are at ciuill warre with each other and indeed like deadly enemies doe cut each others throats 20. But let one of their own learned masters Peter Lumbard conclude this point for vs who saith that Christ dying vpon the crosse offered himselfe is sacrificed dayly in the Sacrament because in
bare assertion without Scripture 29. As touching their crossing of it wee need fetch no other proofe then from the Councill of Trent which in expresse words denounceth Anathema to those that make this faith whereby wee beleeue the remission of our sinnes a necessary ingredient into true repentance and yet it propoundeth reconciliation and remission of sinnes to such as doe repent let all the world therefore know to the eternall shame of the Romish Religion that remission of sinnes and reconciliation by their doctrine may bee obtained by repentance without faith then which what can bee more opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ 30. If they reply that they make faith the foundation of repentance I answere why doe they then exclude it out of repentance is the foundation no part of the house yes it is the chiefest part either therefore it is not the foundation of repentance or els it is necessarily required to the essence of it one or the other must needs bee false but heere is the mystery of this iniquity by faith they meane nor a beliefe of the remission of our sinnes by the bloud of Christ which is the true Euangelicall faith but a generall perswasion of the truth of their Religion and a particular conceit that he which performeth the worke of penance in the three parts thereof shall thereby obtaine pardon of his sinnes and reconciliation with God 31. Secondly whereas hee sayth that wee doe not satisfie for the eternall but for the temporall punishments of our sinnes either heere in this life or in Purgatory hee speaketh nothing for the clearing of their doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for the Gospell teacheth that Christ our Redeemer hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sinnes of all the world yeelding a sufficient and worthy recompence and contentment to God for them and therefore they which say that wee must giue any manner of satisfaction our selues whether for the temporall or eternall punishment due vnto them doe euidently crosse the doctrine of the Gospell And this Aquinas one of their owne illumined Doctors doth in effect confesse when hee sayth that the passion of Christ was a sufficient and super abundant satisfaction for the sinne and guilt of punishment of mankind his passion was as it were a price or paiment by which we are freed from both these obligations to bring in then the foggy mist of humane satisfactions is to eclipse and darken the glory of Christs all-sufficient redemption 32. Thirdly whereas hee findeth fault with Chytraus for saying without proofe that auricular confession is not commanded of God and yet hee himselfe doth not proue it is we might driue out one naile with another and returne vpon him his owne answere but I reply further that diuers of his owne fellow Doctors haue auouched asmuch for Maldonate Erasmus the glosse in Gratian and Gratian himselfe and Rhenanus with diuers others are of the same minde as may appeare in the texts quoted in the margent whose wordes I forbeare to set downe because I shall haue occasion to handle the same in a more proper place one thing I cannot omit that the testimony of Rhenanus is so plaine that our aduersaries not able to giue answere sufficient vnto it haue by their peremptory authority said Deleatur let it bee blotted out as they deale also with Polidore Virgill in the like point and with all other that stand in their way 33. Lastly the redeeming of penance by the purse though Bellarmine shuffle it ouer neuer so cunningly yet is so palpable an abuse and so contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell that the very naming of it is a sufficient declaration of the foulnesse of that Religion which maketh a mart of sinne and setteth repentance which is the gift of God to sale for a little earthly drosse and exchangeth punishment due to the body and soule for a little pinching of the purse 34. The Gospell teacheth that marriage is permitted and set free for all men both Priests and people and that the prohibition of marriage and meats is a doctrine of Deuils But the Romish Religion forbids marriage to a great part of men to wit Priests and Monkes and commands to abstaine from certaine meates vpon certaine dayes 35. Bellarmine excepteth and saith by a distinction that when the Apostle sayth Marriage is honourable amongst all men hee meaneth not all in generall for then it should bee honorable betwixt the father and the daughter the brother and the sister but onely those that are lawfully ioyned together which they that are bound with a vow cannot bee 36. It is a strange fore-head but no maruaile seeing it is the fore-head of the whore of Babylon when the Scripture sayth Marriage is honorable amongst al men to exempt their Votaries from this honour as if they were not in the number of men but beasts and as the assertion is strange in impudency so the reason is more strange in folly for though the father may not marry the daughter nor the brother the sister without incest yet the father may marry and the daughter may marry and the brother and the sister also so that they take those that are not prohibited by the Law of God and nature Now let him shew that Gods Law forbiddeth Votaries to marry and then hee sayth something to the purpose but by his owne confession together with many of his pew-fellowes the prohibition of marriage is no diuine but humane ordinance and institution yea the Councill of Trent it selfe calleth it but an Ecclesiasticall Law and therefore not a Law of God but a decree of the Church 37. Adde to this impudency and folly his crossing of all antiquity for in the Councill of Nice Paphnutius alleadgeth this place of Scripture against those that went about to take away the vse of marriage from the Clergie and in the sixt generall Synode it is expressely applied to the same purpose And Ierome in defence of Charterius a married Bishop produceth the same text 38. As touching Chrysostomes speech to Theodorus the Monke alledged by Bellarmine though it seemeth a little to fauour them at the first view yet in another place he cleereth himselfe from that suspition for he saith plainely that Marriage is so honourable and precious that a man with it may ascend into the sacred Chaire of a Bishop What hath Bellarmine got now by Chrysostomes testimony Surely this If all that Chrysostome saith bee sound doctrine then it is an error in the Church of Rome to inhibite all that are consecrated by holy Orders from the vse of the marriage bed For by Chrysostome Bishops may marry Saint Augustines testimonies alledged by him in the one and twentieth Chapter are little to the purpose for in the first he saith plainely that the Church of God doth not forbid marriage but onely preferre virginitie before it as a greater good and in the second hee approoueth onely abstinence from
Sacrament is really changed into the body of Christ and the wine into his blood if this be true 12. Againe to proue their doctrine of concomitance that is that whole Christ is vnder both formes of the Sacrament Bellarmine produceth examples out of Surius Vincentius and Alexander Aleusis where miraculously out of the bread being broken blood plentifully flowed to the view of the beholders which if they were true as may very wel be doubted yet euince not that doctrine for those miracles might be wroght rather for the coÌ„uictioÌ„ of profane irreligious receiuers confirmation of Christian Religion against all enemies therof whether Infidels or Heretikes then for the proof of the reall presence or coÌ„comitance of both parts of the Sacrament vnder one signe but that they were not true wee haue iust cause to suspect seeing the eldest of those miracles are litle aboue a hundred yere old at what time true miracles were vtterly ceased in the Church falseones were foisted into their roomes as witnesseth Lyranus who sayth that the people in his time were notably deceiued by false miracles forged by Priests and their complices for gaine and Canus who affirmeth that writers in his time forged many things of purpose and suggested false miracles to pamper the peoples humor and to gaine credit to Religion and in that respect taxeth diuerse graue authors for their pronenesse in satisfying the peoples appetite and Agrippa who sayth that the writers of histories making godly lies did counterfeit Reliques frame miracles and deuise terrible fables let these goe then amongst the rest for at least suspected if not conuinced falshoods 13. Further for the proofe of their Canonization and inuocation of Saints it is a wonder to see how many wonders they haue deuised For to omit that which Cardinall Baronius reports as a truth out of Guillerinus and Vincentius touching Saint Fulbert that because he was a most deuout worshipper of the Virgin Mary therefore shee came vnto him in his sicknesse and gaue him her brests to sucke as also how shee came to Saint Bernard in his sicknesse to visit him accompanied with Saint Lawrence and Saint Benedict and to omit how Saint Dominick caused the Deuill to hold the Candle â—o him till it burnt his fingers which Canus brandes with the stampe of a ridiculous fable and how Saint Dunstone pulled the Deuill by the nose or by the lip as some other say with a paire of Pincers which beeing as ridiculous as the former yet is allowed by the Iesuit Delrio for truth to omit also how their Saint Francis had the fiue wounds of Christ printed in his flesh by an Angell with the nailes sticking therein and continually bleeding till his dying day that hee vsed to ride in the aire in a fiery chariot talking with Christ and Mary and Iohn and accompanied with innumerable Angels and that the birds would heare him preach with great deuotion and a wolfe was conuerted by him whom he called brother wolfe and ledde him about with him in his iourney as also to omit how Saint Denis had his head stroken off and after carried iâ— two miles in his hands the like to which is written of Iustinian the Monke Saint Othisa Saint Fulcian and Saint Victorice and how Saint Nicholas in his infancy lying in his cradle of himselfe faiâ—ed Wednesdayes and Frydayes and would not take suck and how Saint ` Patrick caused a stollen sheepe to bleat in the belly of him that had eaten it and how Saint Bede preached to the stones and they answered his prayer and said Amen venerable Bede 14. To omit I say all these and many more as beeing ordinary and common tales in euery mans mouth I will onely commend vnto the Readers admiration some few more rare and yet no whit lesse strange as for example a Parrate being like to bee surprized by a hauke flying ouer the shrine of Saint Thomas of Canterbury cryed miraculously Saint Thomas helpe moe and presently the hawke fell downe dead and the Parrat escaped so the famous Virgin of Lauretto when as a certaine man was on the ladder ready to bee hanged being accused falsely for purloyning his masters hawke assoone as hee did but thinke of her in his heart and desire her helpe the hawke came foorth with iâ—ngling in the aire and houering ouer his head and at last light vpon the gallowes and so freed the poore man from the halter Saint Christophers staffe beeing pitched into the ground began presently to beare leaues whereupon eight thousand men were conuerted to the faith of Christ A Nunne called Beatrix running away with her Paramour liued certaine yeeres in a publike brothel-house but because shee was a deuout worshipper of our Lady our Lady her selfe supplied her roome in the Nunnerie and was taken for Beatrix all the time of her absence Saint Christines tongue was cut out of her head and yet shâ—e spake notwithstanding and her brests beeing cut insteed of blood milke issued Saint Brice beeing accused to bee the father of a base childe caused the said child being but thirty dayes old to speake and confesse that Brice was not his father the same also is said to carry hote coales in his bosome without burning his flesh or clothes Saint Aidus espying eight wolues that were sore hungry gaue them eight lambes of meere compassion which afterwards by prayer bee obtained lafe and found out of the wolues bellies Saint Adrian beeing called vpon by a boy that was beaten the Masters hand was stayd in the aire so that hee could no more touch him 15. What should I tell you of Saint Patrick that droue with his staffe all the venemous beasts out of Ireland or of Saint Roch who beeing sicke of the pestilence in a wood was fed by a hound that brought him euery day bread from his masters table or of Saint Lupe or Low who shut vp the Deuil in a tankard all night that came to tempt him so that he howled and brayed most hideously and in the morning the holy man let him out or of Saint Dunston whose Harpe hanging on the wall sounded melodiously without touching this Antheme Gaudent in coelis animae sanctorum and of Saint Martin who beeing saying Masse a tongue of fire came and sate vpon him as it did vpon the Apostles or of Saint Germaine who comming to the sepulchre of one of his disciples beeing a good while dead asked him how hee fared and if he would no longer goe with him to whom the other answered and said that hee was well and that all things were to him soft and sweet and that hee would no more come hither or of Saint Barbara who turned the sheepe of a certaine sheepheard that bewraied her to her father that sought for her into locusts But if you would haue a lye with a latchet looke into the Legend of the Annunciation of our
foreheads 2. That the Religion of the Church of Rome is not so safe as ours may appeare by comparing our principall doctrines together and first to begin with the Sacrament That the bodie of Christ is truely really and effectually present in the Eucharist both they and we hold grounding vpon that text of Scripture this is my bodie but concerning the maner of this presence the Romanists hold that it is by transub stantiation we by a spirituall presence which notwithstanding is true and reall both in relation to the outward signes and to the faith of the Receiuer Now see the dangers that arise from their doctrine which are not incident to ours 2. First if there be not a corporall presence of Christ and a reall Transubstantiation as they suppose then this doctrine leadeth to horrible and grosse Idolatrie for they must needs worship a piece of bread in stead of Christ And this not onely if their doctrine bee false but being supposed to bee true in case hee that consecrateth be not truly a Priest or haue not an intention to consecrate as oftentimes it falleth out for in both these cases by the grounds of their owne Religion there is no change of substances and therefore as much danger of Idolatrie as eyther of a false Priest or of a true Priests false intention But in our doctrine there is no such danger and yet as true reall and powerfull an existence of Christs bodie in the Sacrament as with them if not more seeing the more spirituall a thing is the more powerfull it is according to the rules of reason for wee are not in danger to worship a creature in stead of the Creatour but wee worship the Creatour himselfe euen Iesus Christ our Redeemer who is there present after a spirituall manner and that as reuerently deuoutly and sincerely as they doe a piece of bread 3. Secondly by this doctrine our aduersaries incline to fauour the Capernaites who had a conceit of a corporall and fleshly eating of Christs bodie and giue iust cause to the Pagans to slander Christian Religion to bee a bloudy and cruell Religion Whereupon the Fathers to crosse the one and stop the mouth of the other taught that Christs speech in the sixt of Iohn was to be vnderstood spiritually and not carnally and that it was a figure and not a proper speech But our doctrine doth giue no such occasion eyther to the Heretikes on the one side or to the Pagans on the other neyther hath it any consanguinitie with the Capernaites and yet wee retaine as certaine and powerfull a participation of our Sauiours bodie and bloud as they doe I know they thinke to escape from this rocke by a distinction of visible and inuisible eating as if the Capernaites dreamed that Christ would haue his bodie to bee eaten visibly but they inuisibly that is say they spiritually which indeed is no cuasion for an inuisible eating is a true eating As when a blind man eateth or a seeing man in the darke and cannot therefore be called a spirituall eating but a corporall neyther doth this free them from approching neere to the Capernaites though they somewhat differ from them nor from giuing iust cause of offence to the Heathen from both which our doctrine giueth full and perfect securitie 4. Thirdly and lastly their doctrine of transubstantiation doth not onely countenance but confirme the ancient heresies of the Marcionites Valentinians and Eutychians that impugned the truth of Christs humane nature for they taught that he had not a true but a phantasticall bodie and what do our aduersaries but approue the same indeede though they seeme to detest it in word when they teach that his bodie is present in the Sacrament not by circumscription nor determination but by a spirituall and diuine presence quomodo Deus est in loco as God is in a place which is asmuch as to say that his bodie is not a true bodie but a spirituall bodie that is indeed a phantasticall bodie Againe the bread which they say is the bodie is not bread in truth but in shew after it is consecrated for there is nothing of bread but the mere accidents without a substance according to their doctrine and so it is in all reasonable construction no better then a phantasticall thing seeming to the outward sense to bee that which in truth it is not Why may not those Heretikes then reason from these doctrines thus If Christs bodie be a spirituall bodie in the Eucharist and the bread be phantasticall bread then why might not his bodie be so also when he was on the earth But the former is true by your doctrine O ye Romanists therefore why may not the latter which is our doctrine be also true But none of these Heretikes can haue any such aduantage from our doctrine which teacheth that Christ in respect of his humane nature is resident in the heauens circumscribed by place and that hee is present in the Sacrament by the efficacie of his inuisible and powerful grace after a spirituall manner as Saint Augustine speaketh and that both the bread remaineth bread after consecration and the bodie of Christ remaineth still a naturall bodie after the resurrection retaining still the former circumscription as Theodoret auoucheth this taketh away all aduantage from Heretikes which their doctrine doth manifestly giue vnto them For these causes Petrus de Alliaco the Cardinall doth confesse that from our doctrine no inconuenience doth seeme to ensue if it could be accorded with the Churches determination And Occham that it is subiect to lesse incommodities and lesse repugnant to holy Scripture Thus wee see that in this first doctrine touching the Eucharist there is more securitie and lesse danger in our doctrine and Religion then in theirs 5. I come to a second point which is touching the merits of works whereby the Romish Religion doth cast men into three eminent dangers which by our doctrine they are free from First of vaine glory for when a man is perswaded that there is a merit of condignitie in the worke which hee hath wrought how can he choose but reioyce therein and conceiue a vaine-glorious opinion of his owne worthinesse as the proud Pharise did when he bragged that he had fasted and prayed and payd his tithes seeing it is impossible but that the nature of man which is inclinable vnto vaine-glory and selfe-loue if it haue a conceit of any selfe-worthinesse should bee puffed vp with a certaine inward ioy and pride and therefore Chrysostome taketh it for wholesome counsel to say that wee bee vnprofitable seruants lest pride destroy our good workes 6. Secondly of obscuring and diminishing Gods glorie and Christs merits For where merit is there mercie is excluded and where something is ascribed to man for the obtaining of saluation there all is not ascribed vnto Christ and although they colour the blacke visage of this doctrine with a faire tincture to wit that all
somewhat longer let the Reader beare with mee for so the nature and nouelty of the matter requireth Their next practice then to defend their Church and Religion is by grosse and palpable lying and falshood yea so grosse and palpable that any ciuill honest man would blush to be reputed the author of such fables which they obtrude vpon silly people as verities necessary to bee beleeued and which they like simple creatures giue faith vnto asmuch as vnto the Gospell it selfe and neither is the one or the other any maruaile seeing Saint Paul prophesied long agoe that on the one side Antichrist his comming should be according to the efficacy of Sathan in all power in lying signes and wonders and on the other that God would send vpon them that receiued not the loue of the truth strong delusion that they should beleeue lyes so that by this prophecy one of the chiefest props of Antichrists kingdome must bee lyes and therefore the Church of Rome making no conscience thereof sheweth it selfe to be no better then the Synagogue of Antichrist If they say that they doe it to a good end namely to maintaine the truth I answere with Iob Nunquid Deus indiget mendacio vestro vt pro illo loquamini dolos Doth GOD stand in need of your lye that you should speake deceitfully for his cause no he will surely reprooue you for it and with Saint Augustine Cum humilitatis causa mentiris si non eras peccator antequam mentireris mentiendo efficieris quod euitaras that is If thou tellest a lye for humility sake or for the truths sake if thou were not a sinner before by lying thou art made that which thou didst auoid what can bee more pithily spoken for the reproofe of these men who by falshood pretend to establish the truth and by lying to vphold their Religion and if neither the Scripture nor this holy Father are regarded by them then let them heare the censure of the Heathen Cicero who concludeth that in virum bonum non cadit mentiri emolumenti sui causa It falleth not to a good man to lye no not for his owne profite sake what are they then in his account who make a common practice to lye for their aduantage But lest I should bee thought to accuse them falsely and in reproouing their lying to fall into the same vice my selfe let vs take a short view of some of their notorious vntâ—uths which are sparsed in their bookes And heere to omit their lying Reuelations lying priuiledges false Canons forged donations counterfeit de lying martyrologies all which are stuffed with notorious falsities and that by the confession of their owne Doctours I will insist onely vpon their lying miracles wherein they vaunt themselues as a marke of their Church and wherewith they labour to vphold most of their erronious opinions 11. And first touching their miraculous transubstantiatioÌ„ and adoration of the Sacrament not finding in Scripture sufficient proofe for it it is strange to see how many monstrous miracles they haue deuised for to win credit thereunto Bozius a man of great fame amongst them telleth vs these three tales first that Anthony of Padua caused his horse to kneele downe and worship the holy hoast by which strange sight a stout Heretike was conuerted to the true faith And secondly Saint Francis had a Cade Lambe which vsed to goe to Masse and would duely kneele downe at the eleuation and adore And thirdly that a certaine deuout woman to cure her Bees of the murren and to make them fruitfull put a consecrated hoast into the Hiue which when after a time shee tooke vp shee not onely found a miraculous increase but saw also a strange wonder the Bees had built a Chappell in the Hiue with an Altar and windowes and doores and a steeple with Bells and had laid the hoast vpon the Altar and with a heauenly noyse flew about it and sung at their Canonicall houres and kept watch by night as Monkes vse to doe in their Cloisters Who would not beleeue now but that the hoast is to be adored if hee be not more senslesse then a horse or a Bee or a Cade Lambe But if this be true why are Mice so prophane that they dare rend it with their teeth And why doth not the Popes Hackney kneele downe and doe reuerence vnto it when hee carrieth it on his backe accompanied with muletters and horse-keepers and Courtisans and Cookes with sumpter-horses and all the baggage of the Court as oft as his Holinesse is to trauell abroad when hee himselfe followeth mouÌ„ted vpon a goodly white palfrey accoÌ„panied with Cardinals Primates Bishops Potentats Is more honor to be giuen to Christs Vicar then to Christ himselfe Or was Anthonies horse more religious then all the Popes horses yea then the Pope himselfe and all his traine And if the hoast bee so soueraigne a preseruatiue for Bees why doe any good housewiues suffer their Bees to perish seeing they may haue the hoast for God amercy or at least wise for a very small price In the booke of the conformities of Saint Francis wee finde this miracle On a time Fryer Francis saying Masse found a Spider in the Chalice which hee would not for reuerence to the Sacrament cast out but drunke it vp with the blood afterward rubbing his thigh and scratching where it itched the Spider came whole out of his thigh without any harme to either O strange miracle and yet not so strange as this that Christs bloud in the Chalice should poyson Pope Victor except Francis a Fryer were more holy then Victor a Pope or the blood in one Chalice were of greater force then in the other but peraduenture the Priest in the one had no intention to turne the wine into blood as the Priest in the other had and then wee know there can be no conuersion but no maruaile if this be true seeing in the festiual of Corpus Christi day we read as great a wonder as this to wit of a Priest that hauing lost the hoast in a wood as hee came to housell a woman that was sicke and hauing whipt himselfe for his negligence went backe to seeke his Lord God and at last spying a pillar of fire that reached from the earth to heauen ran thereunto and found Gods body at the foot of that pillar and all the beasts of the forrest about it kneeling on their foure knees and adoring it with great deuotion ex ept one blacke horse which kneeled but on one knee and that blacke horse sayth the story was a fiend of hell who had turned himselfe into that shape that men might steale him and bee hanged as many had beene This as it was reported to bee done not far from Exbridge in Deuon-shire so it was as solemnely read in the Church and as verily beleeued as any miracle that euer Christ wrought who can doubt now but that the bread in the