himselfe disdained This reason seemes to me very strange that a man may goe to Church to serve his King and may not goe to Church to serve himselfe when as charitie alwayes beginneth at home and if a man be naught in or to himselfe to whom can he be good or that feare of displeasure through apprehended disdaine can excuse a man from doing that which were otherwise unlawfull as though a man were not bound rather to suffer the displeasure of his King with losse of his life then suffer wrack of his owne conscience and if feare of displeasure did excuse Naaman why should not the danger of death losse of fortunes ruine of posteritie and the like excuse Catholiques 4. The fourth reason and most especiall difference is say they that Naaman made a promise before the Prophet and his own train that he would from thence forth serve onely the true God and to that purpose carried earth with him to make an Altar for sacrifice Whereas those that goe to the Protestant Church doe not renounce all heresies nor professe to frequent Masse c. But pray give me leave to say they doe and that herein there is no difference at all For Catholikes that goe to Church are knowne to their Confessaries and their minde and intention is likewise to him knowne as Naamans was to the Prophet And if they be knowne Catholiques their beliefe is likewise knowne at leastwise to their traine if not to others by their communion with the See of Rome so that herein there is no disparitie at all And if they be not knowne it is prudence to keepe themselves so more then to their Confessaries which is a sufficient protestation in these troublesome times For I wonder by what law a mâ—n is bound to make any other Protestation of his beliefe for the doing of a thing indifferent So that as I have said for the said foure reasons and likewise because there is Idolatrie committed at Protestant Churches which I never yet could finde as often as I have frequented the same and doe hope to prove the contrarie the aforesaid Doctors make it unlawfull and scandalous to goe to Church and our case different from Naamans Hence they liken it to that of Eleazarus and the other Maccabees 2 Mac. 6.7 who were commanded by eating Swines flesh to depart from the law of God and their fathers Which say they by no meanes was lawfull to doe or to make shew of doing the same And a man may sweare it true For Swines flesh being forbidden by the law they were bound under sinne to abstaine from the same And if they should have made their brethren beleeve in words that they had eaten they would have told an untruth with dissimulation in a matter forbidden by the law both which were mortall sinnes which is as farre different from our case as light from darknesse For we contend that to goe to a Protestant Church is by no law forbidden but a thing indifferent and by a good intention may be made really good without any dissembling And they bring us an example of a thing which in doing many sinnes are committed so that for the reasons which I have given I conceive that the authoritie of the said rewoned Doctors concludeth nothing against our assertion unlesse the Protestants were an assembly of fallen heretiques where there were danger of sinne by subversion or the like which can never be proved It may be fourthly objected that it is the common opinion of men that to go to Church is scandalous because it is a signe of hereticall falshood and a man so doing is reputed as fallen both of Catholiques and Protestants I answer that it is false and experience teacheth us the contrary For who made it such a signe and Schismaticks that goe to Church with an ill conscience only to save their goods notwithstanding in this they are accounted to hurt onely themselves yet of all Catholiques they are trusted and esteemed as honest men and of Protestants they are esteemed no other And they sinne not as I have said in going to Church but in going with an ill conscience and being barred of simple Priests from other meanes of salvation and in doing so give scandall But you will say they deny their faith in this act I deny that They deny onely recusancie with an ill conscience and not religion Yet I grant that such Schismaticks professe no faith at all And if there be any other opinion of men concerning them it is malicious and pharisaical generated by the craft and deceit of others under the species of pretended piety making people beleeve that there is sinne and scandall in the act when there is none and if any Protestant thinketh otherwise of this they have it from the erroneous customary opinion of some Catholiques revealing the same It may be objected fifthly To communicate with heretiques is sinne and scandall but to goe to Church is to communicate with heretiques Ergo. It is sinne and scandall To which I answer first distinguishing the Major to communicate with hereticks publikely and particularly denounced to be such or in their heresie I grant the Major but deny the Minor in the same sence but to communicate with heretiques not denounced such not in point of heresie to be sinne that is most false for then we should neither eate drinke buy or sell with Protestants which is most absurd Which absurditie to take away and all scruple rising from thence by communicating with heretiques as well in service as otherwaies was the before mentioned constitution of Martin the fifth prudently made Adde that if we may not communicate with Protestants in going to Church we must communicate with Brownists in refraining the Church and so be thought the same with them or else every one must be bound to get himselfe convicted for a Popish Recusant that so Protestants may know him to be a Catholique and no Brownist and so to avoyd water he must runne into the fire If you answer that so he goeth not to Church it maketh no matter what Protestants thinke of him for Catholiques know what he is I reply then by the same reason that if he goe to Church it maketh no matter what Protestants thinke of him for Catholiques may likewise know what he is I answer secondly that the Major supposeth what is not granted viz. That Protestants with whom I goe to Church are formall heretiques which I desire to be first proved For an heretique is he that obstinately denieth any article of faith proposed by the Catholique Church to be beleeved How can a Protestant be said obstinately which includes a knowne infallibility rejected to deny an article proposed by the Catholique Church as I have said before when he beleeves none other Church but his owne For although Protestants hold divers tenets contrary to the Catholike Church which have been justly condemned in their Authours as heretiques Yet whether obstinately held in them the contrary not
their originall Fountaine sith the most of them if not all might be gathered out of more ancient Liturgies For which See Biblioth Patru to 1. And if it be so then it may be said That the mud of Popery fell into them but they sprang not from Popery but from purer fountains * It hath been I confesse a long custome in the Latine Church ever since Pope Vitalian to celebrate the Church Service in the Latine tongue but it was never the custome of the Catholique or Vniversall so to doe The Greeke and Syrian and African and other Churches had from the beginning and have at this day their Service in their own languages Neither is the reason the Priest alleadgeth here of any force namely That w as the Catholike Religion is universall so it should be exercised in an universall language which he will have to be the Latine For first there is no necessitie that the Catholike Religion which is universall should be exercised in an universall language but rather in all languages Secondly since the division of tongues at the tower of Babell there was no language universall in all the world the Greeke was for a time the furthest spread and after the Romane but neither of them nor any other was spoken or understood by all Christians and at this day if we may beleeve travellers no language is so generally knowne and spoken as the Slavonian Thirdly the unity of language maketh nothing to the unitie of Religion or the Church neither doth the Apostle require that the Divine Service be performed in any one tongue but that it be done in a knowne tongue to the edification of the Church 1 Cor. 14.4.12.14.16 And to that end among others was the gift of tongues given x See page 28. Letterr. y See the lettero. pag. 17. z See the letter R pag. 28. a This definition of an heretique is both defective redundant defective for every obstinate deniall of an article of faith makes not an heretique unlesse his conscience be clearely convinced of his errour out of the word of God it is redundant also for a man may be an heretique by denying any article of faith though that article be not proposed to him by the Catholike Church to be beleeved though but his pastour or any other religious Christian out of Gods word clearely propound it to him and prove it or it be read by himselfe in the Scripture if he obstinately persist in the denyall thereof after his conscience is convinced he becomes an heretique b The Protestants of England know other Churches besides their own and some have learnedly discoursed of all the Churches in the Christian world as Purchas Brierwood Mocket Mr. Paget and others 〈◊〉 true it is they acknowledge no infallibilitie in the Roman or any particular Church nor receive any Church for true and Orthodoxe which consenteth not with them in all points of faith either expresly set downe or by cleare and necessarie consequence deduced from holy Scriptures c The Protestants hold nothing contrary to the Catholique Church though they hold many things contrary to the present Romane Church which is neither the Catholike Church nor a sound member thereof as is proved invincibly by Iohn Reynolds praefat thesium Sect. 12. Thes. ss 27. Apol. 5.23 And Bilsons answer to Cardinall Allen part 4. And Abbot against Bishop in a Treatise intituled The true ancient Romane Catholike to which none answer hath yet beene given nor sufficient can be d With what face can he say that the Protestants are incredulous and beleeve not the truth Who entirely beleeve the whole doctrine of the Scriptures together with the three Creeds that which beares the name of the Apostles the Nicene and that of Athanasius together with the foure first generall Councels in which time the Church most flourished as also the joynt Doctrine and unanimous consent of all the Fathers both of the Greeke and Latine Church for five hundred yeeres after Christ our Lord came into the flesh Let this traducer of the reformed Churches answer punctually whether he beleeveth that the learned Doctors Confessours and Martyrs who lived and died within the first 500. yeeres held the entire Catholique faith necessary to salvation or no If they held it not how were they saved upon what good ground or warrant are so many of them canonized for Saints even by the Roman Church but on the other side if they beleeved all things necessary to salvation how can we be esteemed incredulous or defective in our faith who beleeveth all that can be proved to have beene joyntly beleeved and unanimously professed by them e Is this the holy Romane Religion to make a May-game of Religion and to goe to Sermons as to a play to make themselves merry and dispell a Melancholly dumpe Besides their owne third commandement enjoynes them to keepe Holy-dayes and their owne Casuists allow the Lords day to be a day that is holy And is this a piece of holynesse to goe on such dayes to a play yet neither doe I beleeve that he can readily name the man much lesse many men that spake fustian with gravity in our Pulpits but I am sure he who patched up this Safeguard out of rags of Religion and falshood speaks Linsewoolsey through his whole Discourse and contrary to the law ploweth with an Oxe and an Asse The later of which here brayeth irrationally and unjustly against the generalitie of Protestant Preachers and Sermons Forsooth we are silly weake and ignorant men but they are all profound Gamaliels nay Angelicall and Seraphicall Doctors Whereunto I answer as Saint Paul did to the calumnies of the false Apostles 2 Cor. 10.12 We dare not make our selves of the number to compare our selves with them that commend themselves but they measuring themselves by themselves and comparing themselves amongst themselves understand not The Catholiques he saith are Hounds â—lood Hounds I grant and our Ministers timorous Hares they dare not encounter the weakest Romane Catholique they neither understand the controversies of Religion nor dare meddle with any in their Sermons If this were true which all our hearers know to be most false yet me thinks Iuvâ—nal speaks very good reason Loripedem rectus derideat Aethiopem albus And what great Clarks I pray were those of whom Boniface Bishop of 〈◊〉 â—pâ—ke in his time heretofore we had woodden Chalices and golden Priests â—ut now we have golden Chalices and woodden Priests what great Gamaliels were they of whom Bonaventure complaines Quidam sacerdotum â—lavem habent he speaketh of the Key of knowledge quidam claviculam quidam nullam what was he upon whom Sir Thomas Moore thus playes in his â—pigrâ—m tu bene cavisti ne te ulla occidere possit litera nam nulla est lâ—tera nota tibi Be not frighted at the words of the Apostle the letter killeth thou hast taken good order that it shall not kill thee for thou knowest not a lettâ—â— What was he
such a command if he had knowne the truth And if any shew of evill result or scandall arise in that he is not obeyed the necessitie of doing the contrarie act being in danger of death must excuse and take away all scandall for in such a case no humane lawes binde as I shall hereafter say I answer to this Objection secondly that there is a disparitie betweene the said meates and going to Church in that the said meates were not to be eaten of necessitie that is there was neither hazard of life or goods in abstaining or more gaine then prejudice of soules in eating And therefore it was more requisite that the wise should abstaine in a matter of so little moment or necessitie where there was scandall then that the weake should have been instructed and admonished that it might have beene done without sinne which is not so in going to Church For in abstaining from thence there is both hazard of life and fortunes and as I shall hereafter say losse of soules and therefore of necessitie the weake are to be admonished and instructed that there is no sinne in the act neither is going to Church prejudiciall but advantageous to soules as experience teacheth Adde that if there were any humane law or Ecclesiasticall law forbidding going to Church it were not to be fulfilled with hazard of life or goods as all Casuists hold See Azorius Navarr consil de haeret above cited if otherwise it doth not appeare forbidden by the law of God For all humane lawes tend to the preservation and conservation of the whole man even in the greatest state of perfection and where by reason of keeping a law disjuncture either of soule or body may probably follow there that law is for the time to be suspended as appeares in the law forbidding to eate flesh in the Lent saying the divine office with danger of being apprehended and the like where the weake ones are rather to be instructed of the necessitie of suspending the law then the body to perish by keeping the same the same say in our case And I doe with reason perswade my selfe considering the Apostles whole discourse in the aforesaid 8. Chapter to the Corinthians that notwithstanding his words verse the 13. if there had beene no other food to have beene gotten for him to have preserved him from famine then the said flesh so offered to Idols that he would rather have perswaded the weake ones that there had beene no sinne in it if with due circumstances they had eaten and how and in what manner they might safely have eaten and so have prevented his sinning against the brethren verse 12. and striking their weake consciences then by abstaining from that and as is supposed wanting all other food have perished through hunger It may be objected thirdly that those famous Doctors of Rhemes William Allen afterwards Cardinall Richard Bristoe William Reynolds and the aforesaid Gregory Martin who translated the whole Bible into English with annotations upon the same in many places as well of the Old Testament as of the new held it unlawfull for any Catholike to goe to the Protestant Church Ergo It is unlawfull and scandalous to goe to the same To the antecedent I answer that the said Doctors were reverend and learned men and their worke renowned but because they would have the same goe forth with more lâ—stre as pleasing the Pope and to avoid all opposition of the aforesaid suggestors they forsooke the common opinion of Divines in two points then agitated the one that the Pope could not depose Kings of their temporall dominions And the other that Catholiques might frequent the Churches of Schismaticks Which they might well doe for their ends being Doctâ—rs and giving some seeming probable reasâ—ns for the same the contrary opinions not being condemned by the Church but left under dispute Yet hence the consequence doth not appeare true For if the aforesaid Doctors had spoken from their hearts grounding themselves upon the Church or reason their interpretation of Scriptures with notes would with me in these poynts have had great authoritie and the conclusion have stood good Whereas now one of the said foure to wit Gregory Martin having delivered his opinion that it was lawfull for a Catholike to goe to Church as appeares by the said booke of R. P. pag. 109. and 110. it seemeth they did not speake in that point their mindes freely peradventure because it was not expedient for all sorts of people which I confesse to be the best reason Yet for Gods sake let us speake the truth in these troublesome times to men at leastwise of reason and understanding Againe the very reasons they give in their annotations upon the fifth Chapter and 19. verse of the 4. booke of Kings doe shew that they did intend but seeming reason and not wholly convincing for whereas for our opinion is and alwaies hath beene usually brought the example of Naaman the Syrian permitted as I have said before by the Prophet Elizeus to goe to the Idolatrous temple Rimmon which is most proper to our case the aforesaid good Doctors reject the said example as nothing like to the same 1. The first reason is because of the time for since the preaching of Christs Gospel say they we are more strictly commanded to professe our faith then in Naamans time Which reason I conceive under favour to be impertinent as well to Naamans case as to ours for the doing of an act indifferent may neither be a profession or a deniall of faith but a meane betweene both viz. a not discovery of the same Neither was it more lawfull in Naamans time to deny God then now 2. The second Reason is because of the place For that the Noblemans religion was not practised in the Countrey where he went to the temple and so there could no scandall arise thereby This reason is in my judgement besides the purpose for no more is Catholike religion practised in this Countrey where we goe to Church Again it proves not Naamans case hereby more lawfull then the going to Church for there may be scandall where a thing of its owne nature may be lawfully done as there might have beene scandall in our Saviours povertie Matth. 17. if he had not prevented it And there may be no scandall and yet the act unlawfull Therefore if it were lawfull abstracting from scandall that being in our case easily avoyded or taken away the thing may still remaine lawfull For if he that goeth to Church be a knowne Catholike the weake are to be admonished of the indifferencie of the thing and the urgent necessitie he hath to doe it and so scandall is avoyded If he be not knowne how can he give more scandall then Naaman did or to whom 3. The third reason is because of the difference of persons in that Naaman had an Office to serve the King in the temple and therefore he might goe lest otherwise the King should have thought
the common charges and charitie of the rich By which the charitie and unitie of all sorts were much preserved for which cause the said feasts were called Charities of the ancient Fathers and of Saint Paul vers 20. they were called Coenae dominicae our Lords Suppers because they were made in the Churches which then were called Dominicae that is our Lords houses in which feasts because there hapned some foule abuses which the Apostle rebuking vers 22. Why have ye not houses to eate and drinke in or contemne ye the house of our Lord c. they were taken away See Con. Gang. 11. Con. 3. Laod. can 27.28 Apollorum can 39. Clemens Alex. Sâ— Iust. Sâ— August contra Faustum lib. 20. cap. 20. St. Chrysost. hom 27. in 1 St. Ambrose upon this same place by which it appeares no new thing for Catholiques to take some thing with a good intention besides what was instituted by Christ. Here some may aske whether it belongs to me out of my authoritie to institute or renew this pious ceremony in taking bread and wine in remembrance of the death of Christ generally for the prudent Catholiques of England I answer no. God forbid that I should presume to institute or renew any ceremonie in the Catholique Church but I doe onely in compassion of their miseries present to their necessitie if any be in danger of death losse of fortunes or ruine of posteritie and cannot expect leave from the supreame Pastor of our soules the doctrine of Claudius Carinnus de vi pot leg human c. 10 that even in lawes every particular man hath power to interpret the same to his advantage and to dispense with himselfe therein if there occurre a sudden case of necessitie and there be no open way and recourse to the Superiour much more then said I in a pious ceremonie against which there is no law forbidding the same And if you reply that this is taken in a strange Church I answer That in case of necessitie the plâ—ce is impertinent to the thing For Saint Bonaventure that great and pious Doctor using much jaculatory prayers and being upon the place of naturall necessitie and there uttering some of the said prayers the Devill asked him Whether that were a place to pray in to whom he answered in opusc Hic et ubique meum licet orare Deum That it was lawfull to praise God in all places and to receive bread and wine in a Protestant Church from a Minister or to receive the same in a Taverne from a Vintners boy the godly onely know the difference If you reply againe that so we may offer Incense to an Idol in a temple because we may burne perfume and the Idol we know to be nothing I deny that and the disparity is in this that in offering Incense the act and shew there tends to the honour and worship of the Devill For the place being dedicated to him whatsoever is therein done as an usuall ceremonie is taken whatsoever the intention be as done to his honour Which act as it is unlawfull in it selfe to be done because pretended Idolatrie wherein Gods worship is given to the Devill at least in outward shew so it is unlawfull to faine in words the act to be done becauâ—e it is dissembling the object it selfe being likewise forbidden by the law of God both which are great sinnes and apt to cause great scandall which I shall make appeare not to be in our case where I coâ—tend there is no sinne in the act nor yet dissembling nor the object forbidden If you reply thirdly that there is dissembling in going to Church as going two waies in Religion contrary to the Scripture for thereby I seeme to be otherwise then I am the reply is false for I professe but one religion which is Catholique and at Church I doe but observe the picture of true religion ill formed which is but a humane act not hurtfull but by a pious intention may be made good by which all hypocrisie and dissimulation may be avoyded And if I seeme to Protestants to be a Protestant what am I the worse for that I never yet could finde any law to ground an action against the censures of men If they censure me to be a Protestant I am not under their scourge for religion unlesse they will on purpose make an Act of Parliament to cut off my head which shall be no president for any other Iudges or Iustices and then I must set up my rest with a Noble man saying Contra potentiam non est resistentia There is no resistance against power But continuing alwaies loyall both to my King and Countrey and obedient to God and his Church and in so doing giving both God and Caesar their due and that without either sinne or dissembling I had rather they censure mee unjustly yet according to the lawes established for I alwaies stand pro Rege Lege and so misse their aime by an Ignoramus then I loose my life by a pure might But hence it doth not follow for all their censure that I am a Protestant for to be so I must beleeve the 39. Articles of the Church of England which is the definition of a Protestant Which Articles or any other tenents of theirs I meddle not with for if I must doe all things contrary to Protestants lest I should be thought so when they eate I must fast and when they sleep I must wake which is ridiculous As for their thinking me a Protestant it proceeds from want of knowledge for they or most of them neither knowing what a Protestant or Catholique indeed is if Catholiques went to Church they would not know how to distinguish or persecute them it being lawfull among them for every one to beleeve what he pleaseth may easily thinke amisse of me And for me to take benefit of their ignorance and to hide my selfe in persecution untill either the glory of God or good of my neighbour shall urge me to discover my selfe I cannot yet finde my selfe by any law forbidden It may be objected secondly that there were divers Statutes made upon the alteration of Religion in the 2.5 and 6. yeers of Edward the sixth and 1. and 23. of Qâ—eene Elizabeth in hatred of God and his Church as that the Masse should be abrogated and all the Kings subjects should come to Church to heare such Service as was then oâ—dained to distinguish betweene Catholiques and Protestants and that whosoever should say or heare Masse afterwards should incurre certaine penalties as by the said Statutes appeares But no man could obey these commands without sinne Ergo. I answer that I know not much to what purpose this objection can serve R. P. that made it For all Divines as well Catholiques as Protestants know that all humane lawes binde in conscience no â—urther then they are consonant and conformable to the divine law And as farre as they command lawfull unitie and uniformitie to the good
Canons soever forbid Communication with hereticks they are to be understood of notorious hereticks in point of their heresie or particularly denounced excommunicated for heresie and fallen in Catholique countreyes or from amongst Catholiques And not of such as are not formall and subversive hereticks but borne incredulous in a countrey to be converted and not knowing the Catholique Church After all this some may yet say that it hath been a long custome with them to abstain from the Protestant Church above these threescore yeers and they have suffered and lost much by refusing the same and can I have so little judgement as to thinke upon mine own bare word or opinion to make them leave this their custome I answer how small soever my judgement be that it is not only my opinion but the common opinion of Divines in the Catholique Church and I never spake with any Priest in England about this point in my life that was able to give me satisfaction to the contrary Some indeed have answered me that it were lawfull if it were not for scandall Others if it were not a distinctive signe and when I have urged that scandall may be avoyded as I have before said and for a distinctive signe I knew none for who should institute that signe then they have answered that a long custome had brought it in I have blessed my self to thinke that men should so unjustly deale with poore Catholiques as to bring upon them a yoake or fetters which they can keepe upon them by no other law then that they themselves cunningly got them on or chained them about threescore yeeres since and now to kicke of these chaines or their devises would prove forsooth scandall because they would seeme refractary and disobedient to their suggestive humours but to give me a reason why going to Church was unlawfull before the refusall thereof became this supposed distinctive signe or before the same could be cause of scandall I could never yet heare any man give but only the aforesaid R. P. hath given in writing the aforesaid suggested untruths with a great deale of passion that this my opinion was thought rationall â—or almost fortie yeers agoe and since recusancy was brought in as appears by his said booke of many most prudent men in this kingdome which is to me no reason at all For let us propose to any Divine in Christendome these three following questions relating the true state of the Protestant Church in exterior actions for we meddle not as I have said with their opinions in matters of faith and withall adding that we are constrained to them under paine of death and losse of all temporall fortunes 1. Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to heare the Prayers Epistles Gospels and Psalmes of the Catholique Church among Protestants in their Church 2. Whether it be lawfull to heare a Protestant preach in the same place some moralitie although it should by chance happen that some ignorant Minister should speake of some point of mistaken doctrine as that Catholiques trust in their own merits or the like falshood 3. Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to receive bare bread and wine in remembrance that Christ dyed for him as a pious ceremony and whether not better so taken then without such remembrance I dare say that there is no impartiall Divine but will answer Yes And for these opinions I make no question but if I had been as well backed in Rome as the said R. P. was I would have got as great approbation to the same as he had to the same questions after his subdolâ—us manner proposed as followeth 1. Whether it be lawfull to frequent the Churches of hereticks where there is both imminent danger of subversion and scandall 2. Whether it be lawfull to heare the blasphemous and idâ—latrous Sermons of hereticks in which both God and his Church is notoriously and highly abused 3. Whether it be lawfull to receive Calvines Communion of bread and wine which they hold a Sacrament and is a signe of hereticall perfidiousnesse whereby a man betrayeth and denyeth his faith To which every Cathoâ—ique whatsoever would and must answer No but this in truth is not our case For the beliefe of Catholiques is not questioned nor subversion or blasphemie or denyall of faith either apprehended or feared Neither can they scarce possibly happen in the Protestant Church as I have before said but the question only is what Catholiques may exteriorly doe for the safeguard of life with a good intention and how and in what manner they may best converse and preserve themselves from ruine with most securitie Therefore I pray forgive the said R. P. who proposed the said questions in Rome out of his aboundant zeale of money and youth to propagate his family not once considering that it is an impossible thing for them to be hereticks who never were Catholiques As for their custome of Recusancie I say first that it is no custome for a custome is a continuance of a thing time out of minde without any interruption Now recusancy hath been interrupted oftentimes first by Doctor Wright who wrote against the same Ann. 1607. and since him Master Broughton and now my selfe Neither hath it been time out of minde for there are some yet alive borne in Queene Maries dayes who have knowne when our recusancie was not in England and thereupon in these troublesome times doe now goe to Church I say secondly that an inconvenient custome with imprudencie is better broken then kept and the prescripâ—ion of threescore yeeres not good Yet if they will needs claime a right in and to their actions by the same I doe hereby promise not to take it from them by any suit in law For I doe write more to avoyd the scandall of the weake then that I do thinke thereby to satisfie the weake or rob them of their said custome As for their sufferings and losses I am sorry for them and doe assure my selfe that they will receive a great reward for the same because they suffered not so much for the love of recusancie as for the love of God for whosoever doth the meanest worke no indiscretion therein being apprehended by the doer either for Gods sake or for vertue sake although of some considering the act it selfe and not knowing the doers intention it may be judged indiscreet yet the worke may have a reward from God and yet another that doth not the same no punishment Thus the three branches of the said Minor proposition being proved the Conclusion standeth good for the lawfulnesse of going to the Protestant Church Me thinks here I heare some storme that if this my opinion should be admitted as lawfull it would follow that they must likewise take all the oathes that are made against Catholiques which will tend to perjurie To which I answer that I would have them to do things consequenter and any thing for safeguard of life wherein their is no sinne And to
much delighteth in tribulation which ariseth by this recusancie that he would not a toleration of Catholike religion in England if he might Although in his answer to the Authour of the said libell he saith as knowing him not able to procure of Queene Elizabeth and the State a toleration for Catholikes that upon certaine conditions of his he would accept of the same but when he speakes from his heart of the thing it selfe he saith in his said Book cap. 9. pag. 216. That it is such as to aske it of God were to aske we know not what for that persecution is better That the said declaration and Popes rescripts were got by the aforesaid suggestions appears by the writings themselves as they are cited and further by one R. P. of the same family who wrote a booke printed Anno 1607. Contra Anonymum against a man without name Doctor Wright that it was not lawfull to frequent Churches of heretikes where promiscuously he relates all the aforesaid suggestions as the ground of his opinion and bringeth Cardinall Bellarmine and Baronius with eight others most of them of the same Schoole for the approbation of his case Which case as he puts it I thinke any man living would likewise have approved That these men above others were so laborious and serious for this recusancie appeares in that whosoever would oppose them were presently blasted for heretikes or at least fallen men insomuch that Azorius who wrote that it was lawfull for a Catholike to goe to the Church of Schismaticks was so troubled by the importunitie of these suggestions that he was constrained through feare that that part of his family should have suffered some great temporall detriment by his judicious writing as they say to recant his opinion and hold it not lawfull in our case of England See the said booke pag. 106. by all which any man may easily perceive that the aforesaid company were the busie-bodies and that for their owne ends as I have said upon the aforesaid grounds otherwise why should they more then others have beene so importune as to perswade yea compel Azorius who not perceiving under the species of piety their rare politicall drift wrote a common opinion to the whole world to denie that common opinion to have place in England That the foresaid Suggestions were and are false it is certaine by experience to any that know the state of the Protestant Church of England and that to the ruine of soules as shall be proved in the question following That it was procured covertly and by indirect meanes appeares in that onely twelve Fathers were chosen and the whole Corps of the Councell left out and amongst the rest the Bishop of Worcester there then present who knowing better the State and affaires of our Countrey then all the rest it seemes to me that he might have beene one of the twelve whose authoritie would have given more satisfaction to this point to our countrey then all the other selected But it should seeme that it was declared without any debate as a matter of no great importance although it seemeth to my weakenesse a matter of as great weight as any that was then agitated in the said Councel and therefore to leave a whole Councel in so weighty a matter that concerned the affaires of a whole Kingdome in point of Religion and where we might have had an infallibilitie and to adhere to twelve men fallible by suggestion without any debate or dispute in my judgement cannot be without great suspition of sinister proceedings Partly therefore supposing and partly intending further to prove the foresaid suggestions to be false and consequently the said Councel and Popes to hâ—ve beene abused he will indevour to examine the truth of the matter it selfe according to the principles of Divinitie within the bounds of the Catholike Church who wisheth all happinesse and prosperitie aswell to the said Church as to all the distressed members of the same with as much brevitie as may be in the insuing question A SAFEGARD FROM Shipwracke to a Prudent Catholique Question Whether it be lawfull for a Catholique to go to the Protestant Church I Answer it to be lawfull for him who doth it without a doubtfull conscience or thought of sin which I say because if a man should do that which in it selfe is lawfull doubting or not being satisfied whether it be lawfull or no he would sin in doing the same because he would put himselfe in hazzard or danger of sin and as the Wise man saith Eccles. 3. Qui amat periculum peribit in eo He that loves danger shall perish in the same So he that thinks a thing which in it selfe is indifferent to be sinne and doth the same sinneth because such a man hath a will to doe the thing although it were sin and by reason of his sinfull will commits sin Otherwise as I have said before it is lawfull Which I prove first The thing in it selfe is not forbidden by any Law either by the Law of God or the Church Not by the Law of God for no place of holy Scripture can be shewed by which it is forbidden Nor by the Law of the Church for no Councell or Canon of the Church can be produced for the prohibition of the same Ergo it is lawfull It is secondly prooved by an example of holy Scripture Lib. 4. Reg. cap. 5. where Naaman the Syrian Prince is permitted to goe to the Idolatrous Temple Rimmon to waite upon the Syrian King there offering sacrifice Ergo a man may be permitted to go to the Protestant Churches where neither Idolatry is committed or any hurt done Againe by the examples of Ioseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus Joh. 19.38 39. who although they went to the Synagogue of Jews and so not apparent disciples of our Saviour yet they were his disciples in secret For it is there said that after the death of our Saviour Ioseph of Arimathea because he was a disciple of Jesus but secret for feare of the Jews desired Pilate c. Nicodemus also came he that at the first came to Iesus by night c. by which appeares that the Jews knew not of their Religion It is manifest likewise that all the Apostles as freely conversed in the Synagogues of Jews as out of the same when thereby they could best exercise their function and mission For the Rhemists in their annotations upon the 20 Chapter of the Acts vers 16. Confesse that notwithstanding the festivitie of Pentecost was established among Christians yet Saint Paul might hasten to the festivitie of the Jews Therefore as these holy men might goe to the Synagoue and reserve their Religion to themselves so may a Catholique to the Protestant Churches And indeed it is an essentiall ingredient to the Mission of all Apostolicall men to treate and converse with all men concerning salvation in all places best for their purpose It is prooved thirdly by Azorius tom 1. lib. 8. institut
it will be the Scandall of Pharisees as is aforesaid Now to proove the assertion which is the first branch of the Minor Scandall is a word or deed lesse right apt to give occasion to another of spirituall ruine â—ut to goe to Church is no deed lesse right but prudently and chiefely right all circumstances considered Ergo to goe to Church is no scandall and consequenter to goe to Church can yeeld no occasion to my neighbour of spirituall ruine but rather an occasion of both his temporall and spirituall conservation and edification This Minor I prove To goe to heare a piece of a Masse in English is no deed lesse right But to goe to Church is to goe to heare a piece of a Masse in English Ergo to goe to Church is no deed lesse right The Major I prove thus to goe to heare a whole Masse in English the nature of the thing considered and abstracting from the constitution of the Church is not evill For the diversitie of the language takes nothing from the goodnesse of the thing As is manifest in the Greeke Church where Masse is alwayes said in Greeke So that if it be not evill in it selfe to goe to heare a whole Masse in English it is not evill to goe to heare a piece of a Masse in English And consequently not to goe to Church Adde that in the whole Latine Church where it is not lawfull to say Masse in any other language then in Latine becâ—use of the long custome of the Church kept alwayes on foot for this reason that as the Catholique Religion is universall so should it be exercised in an universall language yet it is lawfull and in use to say a piece of the Masse as Collects Prayers Psalmes Epistles and Gospels in any Language of any Countrey whatsoever within the said Church It may be here objected first that although to go to Church be of its own nature a thing indifferent yet hic nunc it is evill For considering the circumstances of time and place it hath a shew appearance of evill apt to occasion sin in another From which we are commanded to abstain by St. Paul 1 Thess. 5.22 saying From all shew of evill refraine your selves To which I answer first That all the appearance of evill which going to Church hath is that in England above other countreys Priests have not been freely left to the Principles of Divinitie or Lay-men to their Christian libertie but it hath been procured to have bin declared unlawfull upon false suggestions and continued thus thought unlawfull by some erroneous judgements Which my neighbour likewise phantasing erroneously apprehends it a species cast from going to Church which indeed is not so nor otherwise then if a man with a blood-shotten eye should behold glasse say it were red when a parte rei it were white It were very hard if I eating fish in the lent and one purblind seeing me eate apprehending it flesh because he goes away scandalized as thinking me to have eaten flesh by reason of his false eyes that I should be said to have given him scandall So it would seeme likewise as hard if a broken phansie or an erring minde should conceive evill species from mine actions which a parte rei are no species at all of them but quite contrary to thâ—ir species that I should thereby be judged to give scandall to little ones No I hope as the erroneous eyes shall beare their owne imperfections so the erroneous judgement shall beare its owne mistake and neither shall accuse me before God of the scandall of little ones Hence I answer secondly to the place of the Apostle before objected thaâ— the appearance or shew of evill is to be understood first that it proceeds really from the act done and that it be not only a conjecturall appearance but morally certaine That no man play Tom-foole in striking him that stands next him without a cause Secondly that the appearance proceeds not from a deed to be done of necessitie either by the Law of God or nature Otherwise we might inferre the Apostle to command contradictories to refraine and not to refraine from such a deed whence proceeds the appearance For if the thing be commanded by the Law of God it must necessarily be done or otherwise sinne And if it were to be done by the Law of Nature the blessed Apostle was not so unreasonable as to bid us refraine from a thing in its owne nature lawfull and of necessitie to be done without admittance of some way to avoyd scandall Although by reason of some circumstance place or person it might have a shew of evill and so for some time be suspended as some things of naturall necessitie yea the Evangelicall counsels may have But in such cases we are to instruct and admonish the weake as I by these presents doe that although it should seeme to them to be evill or to have some shew of evill yet in very deed it is not evill but good And I am constrained under paine of death to do the same After which instruction and admonition if they still persist in their scandall it is not a scandall of little ones but of Pharisees and great ones Neither doth it proceed from infirmitie or ignorance but from malice and is not to be regarded So that it seemes a thing unreasonable and in the strength of judgement against nature that a man shall more regard the trouble of his neighbours conscience at a thing lawfull then the hazard of his own life and ruine of his own family and fortunes in the execution of the same See Diana for this Doctrine and all the Authors by him above cited If any shall here reply to my first answer of the objection that the shew of evill is really in the act of going to Church and not as falsely imagined and that this shew of evill appeares not only to weake and ignorant people but to men of understanding of all sorts and not only to Catholiques but likewise to Schismaticks of all sorts who in going to Church to save their goods confesse that they doe it against their conscience as conceiving it to be unlawfull by reason of the aforesaid Declaration of the twelve Fathers in the Councell of Trent and the foresaid Popes which whether it were gotten by false suggestions or no they discerne not neither doe they dispute but simply obey To make up the rime in reason the more simple they For reason may teach great ones and men seeming of understanding that are Schismaticks or Lay-Catholiques the contrary because nothing is done at Church which is either evill or hurtfull and both reason and learning Priests And therefore I rejoyce with Aristotle Propter illorum cogitare nihil mutatur in re and say that the shew of evill proceeds not from the act of going to Church For in all King Edwards time and the beginning of Queene Elizabeths time untill the thirteenth yeere of her
Raigne when all Catholiques did or might goe to Church going to Church by Catholiques then being in fashion none took scandall thereby because there was then no shew of evill And why should there be now more shew of evill in the act then at that time If ye answer by reason of the aforesaid Declaration I reply that then the species of evill ought to be in the said Declaration as gotten upon false grounds and not in the act of going to Church which any man might easily perceive considering the nature of the act it selfe And the experience of our distressed countrey teacheth us that those indirect proceedings are more apt to generate scandal then the act of going to Church which of its own nature is lawfull and hath been lawfully practised and approved by the common opinion of all Divines of any indifferency in other countreyes and so might have been in ours had it not been for turbulent people who for their owne ends have more troubled the Church in procuring of breves and rescripts then all other nations besides of our condition To Schismaticks I say they sin not in simply going to Church but in going to Church with an ill conscience as thinking that to be sin and doing the same which indeed is not so and the ground of their errour they have had from the misunderstanding of Catholiques To weake ones I answer desiring them to be satisfied because I have and shall prove the thing in it selfe to be lawfull and that I am as I have said in danger and hazard of my life in not doing the same So that by a naturall necessitie I am bound to it Which necessitie if it were not I might peradventure rest in the common Maxime of Philosophers Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora It is in vain done by more that may be done by lesse It may be objected secondly that it is as much scandall to goe to Church as it was to eate of those meats offered to Idols Of which Saint Paul speaks 1 Cor. 8. the eating of which in it selfe considered although the Apostle thought no sin in Wise men or great ones because they did eate the same without any relation at all to the Idoll as he seemeth to intimate verse 4. yet because some ignorant Christians seeing the said Wise men eate did likewise eate the same meats with conscience and devotion as if the said meats had received some vertue or sanctification from the Idol Saint Paul exhorted the Wise men to abstaine from eating the said flesh for that out of mistake and misunderstanding of their eating the aforesaid Christians then newly converted did take offence and sin Whereupon in great zeale he said vers 13. If meate scandalize my brother I will never eate flesh lest I scandalize my brother So that one would thinke that the blessed Apostle would rather have chosen to die as the aforesaid words may import then by eating the said meats or any flesh to have scandalized his brother And St. Augustine in expresse termes lib. de bon conjugali cap. 16. saith It was farre better to have dyed then to have eaten of those meats so offered to Idols conformable to himselfe elsewhere who likewise saith That a man may not commit or occasion so much as a veniall sinne to gaine the whole world Which he that giveth scandall must needs at the least commit Therefore what the said Apostle and St. Augustine said and thought of the eating of the said meats the same ought every Catholique to take as said of the act of going to Church I answer denying the consequence and say that there is a great disparitie betweene the said meats offered to Idols and eaten in the temple with Infidels and the act of going to Church First because in the meats so offered there was not only a shew and appearance of evill but a morall malignitie therein as well to great as to little ones Which although the wise did take away that the said malignitie touched not them yet the weake neither did or had understanding so to doe Whence the Apostle said vers the 7. that there was not knowledge in all For the morall malignitie that was in those meats to all was a prophanation and impuritie in them as being things dedicated to the Idol or the Devill So that as a man receiveth good by holy bread or things sanctified so he receiveth evill by a thing prophaned or maligned Which morall malignitie the Wise taking away as I have said by blessing the said meats to the use of their bodies and conceiving both them and the Idoll as they were in themselves meere creatures both created for the use of man did eate what was usefull to eate without sinne Whereas the weake not so much as considering the prophanenesse of the meats but seeing the Wiser eate with error of judgement conceived vertue and sanctification in the same as being eaten in the temple and offered to the Idol by Infidels and so with conscience and devotion they received the same and were as the Apostle saith in the said seventh vers polluted thereby Now in going to Church their is no morall malignitie at all in so much that scarce the weakest man can invent how to sin by any thing that is there done It being of its owne nature so indifferent and to a good intention good that a parte rei their is no appearance of evill therein If any one say that there is appearance of evill and scandall by reason of disobedience in that the act is done contrary to the declaration of the said twelve Fathers and certain Popes I answer that the declaration is as if it were not because gotten upon most false suggestions as I have and shall say and consequently the minds of the said Fathers and wils of the said Popes is to us in this matter as yet unknowne and the species or shew of evill from thence proceeding rather to be lamented then regarded If the reply be made as before that the suggestions are not examined but the will of the aforesaid Superiors hath alwaies beene held as declaring that which hath been best for the soule and dehorting from going to Church and that so by reason and vertue hereof there results a certaine shew of evill in doing the same which maketh it appeare to most men unlawfull and consequently scandalous I rejoyce as before that the instruction and admonition of the indifferencie and necessitie of the act ought to take away all scandall howsoever apprehended and that such as apprehend it unlawfull and will not be satisfied cannot doe it And lastly such as will not be satisfied but scandalized are not to be regarded as I have said before Adde out of Navar Man c. 23. n. 38. That it is not a sinne in a man not to obey his superiour when he hath probable reasons to thinke that his superiour was deceived in so commanding or that he would not have given
being sufficiently proposed at leastwise to most of them I much doubt For as Diana saith 5a. parte pag. 240. col 1a. A man speaking heresie that is a proposition condemned by the Church without an hereticall consent is no heretique neither in curreth excommunication denounced against heretiques so that although they be incredulous and beleeve not the truth yet they are not properly and in rigor formall heritiques Adde that there is no more sin to goe to the Protestant Church then to goe to them to dinner or to goe with them to a play or other sports And I for my part had rather give twelue pence to heare a Sermon then take five shillings to see a play For there is no such sport as to heare a weake fellow speake fustian with gravitie or tell a fable of the whore of Babylon or Babylonians for so now they terme Catholiques with erected eyes in earnest Or why should it be more lawfull to see a play where most commonly intercedes scurrilitie and obscene gestures and the end of which is nothing but vanitie then to heare a Sermon where perhaps in some places or by some simple men their may be some untruth told of the Pope to please their Auditory although most commonly nothing but moralitie which is the end and intention of the same I pray resolve me § 2. It is not unlawfull to goe to Church because Recusancie is a distinctive signe Which is the second branch of the Minor THat Recusancy is a distinctive sign of a Catholique from a Protestant is most false Which is thus proved If Recusancie be a distinctive signe it is a signe naturall or by institution but neither can be said Ergo it is no signe The Minor is proved Not naturall for as Hurtado above cited well observeth Actions and things are not of their own nature significant but have naturall and politicall uses independent of any signification For a bush hung out at a Taverne doore doth naturally signifie no more wine to be sold then any other creature whatsoever Nor doth the habit of a Bishop naturally signifie a Bishop more then a Judge and so of other things No more doe naturally the actions of men But admit that Recusancy were improperly said a naturall signe yet it would naturally signifie no more a Catholique then a Brownist for he refuseth likewise to goe to Church or any other Sectary Although a posteriori it might be thought by discourse to signifie some one displeased with the Protestant Church but why or wherefore it would never signifie Not by institution for if so who instituted the same God or man Not man for it is out of his power to signe the people of God from not his people It is only the owner of the flocke that must signe the sheepe and none other unlesse it be by speciall order from him Hence when God would signe his people in the old Testament from the people of other Nations he himselfe instituted Circumcision Gen 17. as a distinctive signe betweene them and others that whosoever had that signe should be of his people and who so had it not was to be rejected Neither was it sufficient that any man had accidentally and by the institution of Abraham any other signe by which he might be knowne from others because he was not thought sufficiently marked nor accounted any one of Gods people by any other sign then Circumcision Which was the sole marke of God saying All the male kinde of you shall be Circumcised And this is consonant to reason For one man may get a distinctive signe of another mans institution shall God therefore own him Brownists as I have said have Recusancie doth it therefore follow that they are likewise Catholiques If a sheepe in my neighbours flocke should teare an eare in a bramble or bush or accidentally breake an horne this sheepe is hereby distinct from the rest yet the owner doth not own it by that marke but by a marke of his own institution and ruddle So it is in the present That God did not institute the same it is so evident that it needs no proofe For where may we finde his institution Vnlesse we should run to the all-knowing spirit of hereticks Hence it follows that Recusancie is no distinctive signe If you aske me what is then the signe to know a Catholique from any other Sectary I answer His beleefe of the Creed of the Catholique Church and his lâ—fe at all times in communion with the See Apostolique So Stratford lib. 2. de Eccles. cap. 6. pag. 188. It may be here objected first the common opinion of Divines as the said R. P. saith 2a. 2ae q. 3. To use a distinctive signe of a false religion that properly is such is a deniall of faith and evill in it selfe But the Service said in a Protestant Church is such Ergo. I grant the Major For if the signe be proper of a people rejected of God as since the promulgation of the Gospel Circumcision is to a Jew the Major must needs be true But if the signe be garments or the like used to the worship and ceremonies of a false law which some fondly call a proper signe then the Major meaning the use of such a signe to be a denyall of faith is false according to Diana resol 34. pag. 191. above cited Azorius Sanches and many others there Because such signes being naturall things may be lawfully used as I have said before independent of any such signification and so not properly signes whatsoever R. P. saith to the contrary upon his own bare word The Minor proposition I deny For who instituted that service to be such a signe not God as all Catholiques will confesse but rather the contrary it being Catholique Not themselves for it would savor too much weakenesse to thinke that they would institute to themselves a signe of a false religion And if it be taken for a signe naturally although improperly signifying then I say of its own nature it signifies no more a false Religion in a Protestant then a pious ceremony in a Catholique For Catholiques say the same service Catholiques preach moralitie and each may if hee please receive bread and wine once in a day in a weeke or a moneth in remembrance that Christ dyed for him and this shall be better done then to eate bread and wine without such remembrance For receiving bread and wine See that deduced out of Azorius tom 1. lib. 8. instit moral c. 11. Navar. consil 15. de haeret num 2. Which were but to renew in an urgent point of necessitie the old custome in the Apostles time as appears by the Corinthian Christians in Saint Paul 1 Cor. 11. who did eate and drinke in the Church besides what they received of Christs institution as his true and reall body and blood For after the Sacrifice and Eucharist was ended there were kept Church feasts for the reliefe of the poore upon
they can alleadge some speciall priviledge to the contrary but divers generall Councels have erred A generall Councel of Prophets 1 Kings 22.12 erred saying The Lord shall deliver Ramoth Gilead into the Kings hand a generall Councel of Priests Matthew 26.65 erred damnably in condemning Christ for a blasphemer guiltie of death The generall Councel held at Arminum erred denying the Sonnes equalitie with the Father at Ephesus confounding the two natures in Christ at Nice under Irene decreeing that Angels are to be painted because they are of a corporeall nature at Constance denying the Laitie to be bound to receive the communion in both kindes against the expresse precept of Christ Matth. 26.28 and Iohn 6.53 And of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11.28 At Florence and after at Trent defining that the effect of the Sacrament depends upon the intention of the Priest or Bishop who administreth it Which if it were true no man in the Roman Church could ever be assured either of his baptisme or of his confirmation or of his absolution or of his ordination or of the validitie of his matrimonie or of his safe adoration of the Host or of the vertue of his extreme unction For how can he certainly know the intention of the Bishop or Priest who administred unto him these rites all which they account sacraments Neither can they evade by saying that these Councels might erre because they were not confirmed by the Pope for the Popes were present at all these later either in person or by their Legates and it is for certain that their second Councel at Nice was confirmed by Pope Adrian at Constance by Pope Martine at Florence by Pope Eugenius at Trent by divers Popes Lastly if Councels had an immunitie from error the prayer which they made at their Councels registred by Gregory the Great l. 7. Epist. were a meere mockerie The prayer was conceived in this forme Quia conscientià remordente tabescimus ne aut ignorattia nos traxerit in errorem aut praeceps forsitan voluntas impulerit a iustitia declinare ob hoc te poscimus te rogamus ut si quid offensionis in hac concilii celebritate attraximus condonare et remissibile facere digneris Because we pine away through remorse of conscience fearing lest either ignorance have drawn us into error or a headie will driven us to swerve from justice for this we pray thee we beseech thee that if we have done any thing amisse in this great and famous assembly thou wouldest vouchsafe to pardon it I conclude therefore with the words of Leo in his Epistle to Anatolius who lightly phillips off the authoritie of the generall Councel held at Ephesus in which there were above 600. Fathers In one word Tanquam refutari nequeat quod illicitè voluerit multitudo as if that could not be refuted which a multitude hath unlawfully determined giving withall most wholesome conusell to all Councels nulla sibi de multiplicitate congregationis concilia blandiantur Let no Councels flatter themselves with the great multitude of persons assembled in them as if that might priviledge them from errour n Here least the Reader should before he be aware be bitten by a snake lying under the grasse I hold it necessary to distinguish between two questions which may seem to be a like but indeed are very different The first whether Papists may goe to Protestant Churches The second whether a Protestant may goe to a Popish Church He that shall give the same solution to both these questions shall give a greater wound to the Protestant cause in the latter then his plaister will salve in the former The Protestants and Papists in this stand not upon even tearmes for there is nothing in the Protestant Liturgie or Service which the Romanists doe or by their own Rules can except at The Confession forme of Absolution Prayers Hymnes Collects Lessons Epistles and Gospels are either such as the Papists themselves use or at least such as they dislike not whereas it is farre otherwise in the Romane Missall For there is sprinkling exorcised water censing books and pictures worshipping images invocation of Saints prayers for the dead intercession by the prayers and merits of souls departed and which is the height of all idolatry adoration of their Host or breaden God and all this service performed in an unknowne tongue contrary to the expresse order of the Apostle 1 Cor. 14. all which the Reformed Churches condemne and abhorre and whereas this Author alleadgeth there can be no text of Scripture brought forbidding Papists to come to our Church I beleeve him but on the other side there are many expresse Texts of holy Scripture from whence it may be strongly inferred that no Protestant whose conscience is convinced of the manifold idolatries and superstitions wherewith the Romish Liturgie is polluted can with a safe conscience goe to Masse as namely Psal. 26.4 I have not sate with vaine persons neither will I goe in with dissemblers I have hated the congregation of evill doers and will not sit with the wicked 1 Cor. 10.7 Neither be ye idolaters as were some of them vers 14. Wherefore my dearely beloved flee from idolatrie 1 Ioh. 5.21 Keepe your selves from idols 2. Cor. 6.14 What fellowship hath righteousnesse with unrighteousnesse or what communion hath light with darknesse vers 16 What agreement hath the Temple of God with idols vers 17. Wherefore come out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord and touch not the uncleane thing and I will receive you o Although I have no meaning to drive away Papists from our Churches nor purpose to enervate the kindly and right arguments which this Priest bringeth to perswade them thereunto yet I cannot let passe this wherwith true Professours may be very much scandalized For what religious heart doth not tremble to thinke of going in and bowing in the temple of an â—doll in which as the Apostle teacheth the service that is done and the sacrifice that is offered is to devils 1 Cor. 10.20 and no better was this Rimmon the Syrian idoll I answer therefore 1 that the case of conscience Naaman put was not whether he might goe with his Master into the house of Rimmâ—n and offer sacrifice with him unto the idoll but whether he might not waite upon his Master thither and performe a civill for the bowing spoken of was as Câ—iâ—tan well noteth genuflexio obsequii non imitativa a bowing to the King not to the Idoll oâ—â—ice to him or make an obeysance whilest the King leaned on his hand and yet his heart smote him for this and his conscience misgave him that the Lord would be displeased with him for it for so much his prayer importeth The Lord pardon thy servant in this thing Secondly the words of the Prophet Elisha Goe in peace doe not necessarily import an approbation or permission of that which Naaman proâ—ounded but either a meere forme of valediction as if he had said in our
of whom Poggius writeth that after he had said Masse bidding the Feast of Epiphanie he spake to the honest rusticks on this wise My good neighbours to morrow you are to keepe good cheere and celebrate a high feast the feast of Saint Epiphanie a most holy wight but whether Epiphanie were male or female a he Saint or a she Saint I finde it not in my books What was he that Christened a childe with this forme of words Ego baptizo te in nomine Patria Filia Spiritua Sancta What was he who reading in the Gospel of Saint Iohn invenimus Messiam lept out of his skin for joy saying Now to the confusion of all Hugonots I have found the Masse in the new Testament What was he who reading in the Epistle Melchisedec Rex Salem panem vinum protulit translated it thus King Melchisedec brought forth salt bread and wine What was he who in a dispute about putting hereticks to death most Clarke like prooved his conclusion that hereticks ought to suffer death because the Apostle saith Hereticum post unam aut alteram admoniâ—ionem devita 1 Titus 3.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is shun or avoyd but this silly animal mistooke the verâ—e devita for a proposition and a nowne as if the Apostle had said de vitá out of life with him Neither doth Pope Siricius better argue against Pâ—iests marriage Men in holy Orders must not contract Matrimonie because the Apostle saith They that are in the flesh cannot please God neither Innocentius against Lay-mens reading Scripture The beast that touched the Mount was to be thrust thorow with a dart Ergo. The people must not meddle with the Scripture As for their manner of preaching who so much scorne and deride ours let all travellers speake whether it be not thus A Parish Priest or some Monk or Frier gets up into a spacious Pulpit and there runs himselfe out of breath from one side to the other before his houre glasse be halfe run of whom a man might well demand as some one did in Tully of a declaimer Quot millia passâ—um declamasti When this shaveling betweene whose head and heaven there is not a haire first appeares to the people he crosses himselfe as their manner is when they are affraid of evill spirits then reads the Gospel of the day in Latine whereof the people understand not a word and after he hath spent some time in translating it and scored out his way he conveighes a prayer into a parenthesis concluding it with an Ave Maria. After this resuming the words of his Text in the handling of them he robs and deplumes the late written posâ—ils upon that â—ospell and like the Crow in the Poet Cloathes his Discourse with the choicest of their feathers in the end sticks two or three gaudy feathers out of the Peacockâ— taile I meane the golden Legend telling them how St. Dominâ—ck spying the Devill sitting in the Church like a Sparrow called him to him pluckt off all his feathers and put him to a great reproach or how St. Dunstane tooke the Devill by the nose with a paire of tongs fire hot Or how St. Bernardâ—lest â—lest good Ale and giving the same to certaine lewd persons caused divine grace to enter into them And here if the Author and his Consorts please to be merry at Sermons spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici But if any more ingenuous Papists like Lodovicus Vives condemne the Author of your golden Legend for a man of a brazen face and leaden heart and bring better stuffe yet even these come farre short of the Preachers of the Reformed Churches in many remarkable particulars First all the Popish Preachers take their text out of the Gospel or â—pistle of the Day but the Protestants confine themselves not to those parcels of Scripture but make choice as God shall direct them for the most profit of their flocke of any part of the Canonicall Scripture to expound it Againe the Protestant Preachers in their translation follow the originals the Greeke and Hebrew the Papists as they are bound under paine of a curse follow the corrupt vulgar Latine which they may not upon any pretence reject The Protestants deliver no Doctrine of faith for which they bring not Gods word The Papists ground many of their Doctrines upon unwritten Traditions or Decrees of Popes or Councels The Protestants build upon the true foundation gold silver and precious stones that is heavenly solid and precious Doctrine conformable to holy Scriptures The Papists hay and stubble as namely the putting Thrones and Dominations with Archangels Angels Cherubins and Seraphins in ranke and file a Geographicalâ— description of foure Regions under the earth Hell Purgatory Limbus Patrum and Limbus Infantum an imaginary treasury of super-abundant satisfactions to be dispenced by the Pope hallowing of Water Salt Creame c. Christening Bels Singing Dirges and Trentals Pilgrimages Whippings Masses without Communicants dry Communions censing Pictures Invocation of Saints worshipping of Images with Reliques and such like trash f De te fabula narratur unlesse you can substantially refute Vigniers his Theater of Popes or Plessis his Historia Papatus or Abbot Down and Powell and infinite others accurate and elaborate Treatises De Antichristo you must aske blessing of the whore of Babylon as your mother g Will you call it the same wine which was powred out into two cups whereof one hath store of rats-bane in it See pag. 16. letter â— and pag. 33. letter u h There was never such a prophane gamster heard of as this Masse-Priest who playeth not only with the word of God and prayers but with Sacraments here and most solemne oathes hereafter what horrible prophannesse what detestable hypocrisie is it I will not say for a Lay Papist but a Romish Priest not only to be at our Service but to stay at the Communion to heare the Ministers exhortation out of the Apostle to all persons that come to the holy Table Diligently to try and examine themselves before they presume to eate of that bread and drinke of that cup for as the benefit is great if with a true penitent heart and lively faith we receive that holy Sacrament for then we spiritually eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood then we dwell in Christ and Christ in us we be one with Christ and Christ with us so is the danger great if we receive the same unworthily for then we be guiltie of the body and blood of Christ our Saviour we eat and drinke our own damnation not considering the Lords body we kindle Gods wrath against us when we provoke him to plague us with divers diseases and sundry kinds of death Nay more if he joyne with the whole congregation in the rehearsall of the words of the institution and the consecratory prayer will he present himselfe on his knees for he excepts no Ceremonies and receive the consecrated elements delivered to him with these