betweene God and his Church and is if not in malignitie aboue heresie yet heresie in the highest degree for it robbeth God not onely of his glorie but of his essence and lifteth vp another into his throne but our sinne if it bee a sinne is at the highest euen in the reputation of their slander but heresie and that in the lowest degree consisting in matter of circumstance touching the worship of the creature and not in any fundamentall point of Religion that concerneth the Deitie Now whether conscience should bee more afraid of this or of that I thinke no man doubteth that hath a conscience 19. Fourthly we are sure that we cannot inuocate any but the true God for our Prayers are made vnto the blessed Trinitie and to none other But they are in danger to pray vnto false Saints in stead of true yea vnto those that eyther neuer were in rerum natura or that are in hell for the being of many of their Saints is grounded vpon their Legends and humane Stories which were subiect to lying erronious deceit the sainting of many that are inrowled in that Kalēder dependeth vpō the Popes canonization which they themselues cannot deny but is subiect to errour in so much that Caietane a learned and famous Romanist is reproued by Catharinus another of the same stampe for calling in question the pretended miracles for the Virgin Maries conception saying That if one Saint be doubted of the rest also may bee doubted of and therefore that no man can inuocate or worship them without manifest perill of Idolatrie Now many of their Saints may bee iustly doubted of if not worthily reiected Saint Augustines saying being notorious that many that are tormented in hell with the Deuill are worshipped by men in earth Therefore their inuocation must needs be dangerous 20. Lastly that God heareth our prayers no man doubteth but how the Saints heare them whether by the declaration of Angels or reuelation of God or in the glasse of the Trinitie they themselues are not able to determine what wise man now will relye his faith vpon such vncertainties and not choose rather to make his prayers to God who wee are assured heareth them and knoweth the heart rather then to them of whose knowledge and presence wee haue iust cause to doubt 21. The worship of Images and relickes doth plunge the practisers thereof into many apparent dangers which the refusers cannot fall into As first in shew at least they cannot but be iudged breakers of the second Commandement which forbiddeth the worship of any Image of whatsoeuer is in heauē earth or Sea that is in the whole world but they worship many and diuers Images of all sorts therefore in shew must needs be transgressors of the second Commandement Neyther can they rid thēselues frō this crime but by new deuised distinctions of latria and dulia I doll and Image the one being of Heathen gods the other of Christian Saints And in a word some of them are driuen to say that this Commandement was no part of the morall Law but a mere ceremoniall precept pertaining onely to the Iewish Church as hath beene shewne before vpon what quicklands and shelfes are they driuen that cannot cleare themselues from Idolatrie but by such desperate distinctions which haue no foundation in the word of God the Commandement prohibiteth all worship of any Image yea of the Creator himselfe and all his creatures they come with their niceties of distinctions and would make vs beleeue that not all worship but that onely which is called latria is forbidden nor all Images but the Idols of the Heathen that is of such things as neuer were nor to all people but the Iewes onely I am sure we in shew at least and in verie deed in truth doe giue more reuerence to this Commandement for plainly and directly without distinguishing diminishing altering or any wayes wringing the precept wee condemne all worship of all Images in all people whatsoeuer as impious and Idolatrous so that wee are in no dapger of transgressing this Commandement as they are if their distinctions helpe them not out 22. This danger is in respect of God another followeth in respect of conscience The Paynims worshipped stockes stones that is dead and liuelesse things as both the Prophet Esay and the Prophet Dauid doe plainly auouch Now doe not the Romanists the like for let it bee granted that their Images and those of the Heathen differ essentially and that in truth our Romanists worshippe not simply stockes and stones but the things represented by them yet this cannot bee denyed but that in outward appearance their worshippe hath great resemblance to that of the Heathen For when they fall downe before the crosse and say All haile O Crosse our onely hope c. as it is in their Masse Booke and Thou onely art worthy to beare the ransome of the World what doe they but at least in shew worship a stocke and a liuelesse thing as the Paynims did and when they say they worshippe not the thing it selfe but the thing represented by the Image as in the Crosse Christ that was crucified on the Crosse what do they but excuse themselues by the same reason which the Panims did for Seneca sayth that by Iupiter standing in the Capitoll with lightning in his hand they vnderstood the preseruer and gouernour of all things and Peresius a learned Papist affirmeth that few or none among the Gentiles thought their Idols to be Gods yea Saint Paul himselfe telleth vs that the Altar at Athens was dedicated to the same God that Paul preached though vnknowne vnto them So that in the matter itselfe and in the manner of excuse they are without all doubt cousen-Germanes to the Paynims and if they bee not in the gulfe of their Idolatrie yet they confine verie neere vpon the Coasts thereof whereas wee more wisely march aloofe and are afraid to approch any whit neere vnto them This I speake by way of supposition if their Image-worship bee not the same with the Paynims but if it be as it is indeed as hath beene proued before then with the heedlessefish they are leaped out of the frying pan into the fire they are not any longer in the danger but in the mischiefe it selfe let them choose which of these they will one they must needs fall into 23. Thirdly if wee respect charitie this doctrine is in danger to breake the cords thereof by giuing a double offence one to their owne silly ignorant seduced people for they not being able to distinguish of their schoole distinctions latria and dulia proper and improper worship nor to put a difference betwixt the Image and the samplar which it representeth and being warranted to fall downe before the Image doe ordinarily fall into Idolatrous worship which is so common and notorious a thing among the ruder sort that Polidore Virgil Cassander and Agrippa all profest patrones of
that entring into their Temples they were sprinkled not that they might be defiled but that if they had any sinne they might be purged from it Thus it plainely appeareth that this was a Heathenish custome which how it can agree with the Church of Christ I know not sure I am that in the Primitiue Church there was no holy-water besides the water of Baptisme that can be proued by any good authority for the testimonies of Alexander the first Clement and Basil alledged by Bellarmine are all counterfeit as partly the matter in them contayned and partly the censure of Eusebius and Erasmus doe sufficiently proue and might here bee demonstrated if I thought it necessary neither doth it agree with the nature of those times to the which S. Iohn so lately before had left this doctrine that the onely purgation of sinne was the bloud of Christ and not holy-water consecrated by a Priest 9. In like manner their vse of Incense on their Altars to driue away deuils as they say doth sauour both of Iudaisme and of Paganisme That the Iewes vsed to burne Incense in sacrifice to God is no question for they had their Altar of burnt Incense appoynted by God himselfe for that purpose this Altar without question was a type of Christ our Mediatour and the incense of the prayers of the Saints which are then acceptable vnto God when they are offered vp in the name of Christ who is the Altar that sanctifieth all our sacrifices This is so euident not only out of holy Scripture but froÌ„ the full consent of all Writers old new that it is needles to stand to prooue it And therefore offering of Incense being a shadow of things to come why should it still remaine seeing the Sunne of righteousnesse is risen in our Horizon and hath â—ispelled all shadowes by the glorious beames of his presence As touching the Pagans Polydore Virgil confesseth that it was their custome to offer Incense to their Idols And Theodoret affirmeth that when Iulian distributed gold amongst his Souldiers hee commanded an Altar full of coales to bee set by him and Frankincense to bee layd on a Table to the end that euery one would recieue gold at his hand should first cast Frankincense vpon the Altar and this hee did to distinguish the Pagan from the Christian By which it is euident by the way that at that time this was not in vse in the Church This Iewish and Paganish custome then how commeth it to passe that it should now bee taken vp as a holy seruice of God Are not all Iewish Ceremonies at an end by the coÌ„ming of the body which is Christ And is it fit that Christians should learne to worship God froÌ„ the Gentiles which were worshippers of deuils These things are so dissonant to the nature of true Religion that they admit no iust reconciliation Sure it is that the Primitiue Church neuer knew the vse therof as appeareth both by that Example of Iulian before alleaged out of Theodoret and also by testimonies of Arnobius Eusebius and Augustine all which acknowledge that the Church in their time had no such custome We goâ—â—into Arabia saith Saint Augustine to fetch Frankincense God requireth of vs the sacrifice of praise As for the auncient Leiturgies and Dionisius that mention it in Gods seruice wee care not for them seeing all men either vehemently suspect them or vtterly reiect them as counterfeit 10. Againe the Iewes had their holy oyle wherewith their Kings Priests and Prophets were anoynted which was a type and figure of that spirituall vnction of grace wherewith Christ our head was anoynted aboue his fellowes and all his members in a due proportion The Church of Rome hath also reuiued this Ceremonie and that after a farre more superstitious manner for there was not halfe such a stirre at the making of the holy oyle of the Tabernacle as there is at the consecrating of their holy Chrisme it would euen prouoke the spleene to laughter and the gall to bitternesse to heare or behold the apish trickes that they vse at the making of their precious Chrisme such muttering such charming and enchanting such blowing and breathing such exorcising and coniuring the deuill by the mitted Bishop first and then twelue Priests in their order before they come to Aue Sanctum Chrisma All haile O holy Chrisme as is wonderfull What is this I pray you but a profest restoring of a Iewish Ceremony and a plaine declaration that their Priests are rather Iewish than Christian and that those graces of Gods spirit which were figured by their holy oyle are not to bee found in cheir Church seeing they retaine so superstitiously the type thereof If they say that Saint Iames mentioneth oyle to bee vsed at the visitation of the sicke whereby they recouered health I answer first that this was no such consecrated oyle as is in vse in the Church of Rome and secondly that it was applyed onely to the sicke that were in danger of death not to young Infants that are new come into the world at their baptisme thirdly that it was not an instrument of spirituall grace but of corporall health and lastly that it lasted onely during the time that miracles liued in the Church and dyed when they dyed so that Saint Iames his oyle maketh nothing for the maintenance of the Romish Chrisme and therefore I leaue it vnto them as a meere Iewish superstition 11. Lastly doth not the high Priest of Rome imitate the high Priest of the Iewes in his Pontificall garments are not their Fryers and Anchorites â—pâ—sh counterfeiters of the Leuiticall Nazarites doth not their Iubile both in name and nature represent the Iewish Iubile no man that knoweth the one and seeth the other but will confesse this to be true for Aaron wore a Crowne vpon his head to signifie the Kingly power of Christ the Bishop of Rome hath three Crownes to signifie forsooth his threefold power in Heauen Earth and Purgatory Or as Aretine iested one for the flesh another for the world and the third for the deuill and none for God Aaron had a plate on his Crowne wherin was engrauen Holinesse to the Lord. The Bishop of Rome vsed to weare a plate on his head wherein was written the word Mysterie as if he would professe himselfe to be the vpholder of that mystery of iniquitie spoken of by the Apostle Aaron had his Ephod and Robe the Bishop of Rome hath answerable therevnto his rich Pontificall attire which in many resemblances is like vnto the same yea the Romanists doe plainely Iudaize in bringing in againe into the Priestly order such variety of garments as the Pall the Miter the Crozier-staffe the Albe the Chimere the gray Amice the Sâ—oale with such like Insomuch that when their Bishops come forth to doe diuine seruice a man would thinke that he saw Aaron addressed with his attire to sacrifice at the Altar 12. As touching
call the Scripture a dumbe Iudge some a dead Letter and without a Soule others dead Inke others a Nose of Waxe to be wreathed this way or that way others say that it is no better then Aesops Fables without the authority of the Church all of them ioyne in this that it is not simply necessary that it was written not to rule our faith but to be ruled by it and that Christ neuer commanded his Apostles to write any Scripture and that it is subiect and inferiour to the Church all these and many other bitter and blasphemous speeches they belch out against the Scripture whereby they plainely bewray their cankred hatred against the Scripture and all because they finde it contrary to their humour and an enemie to their Religion 33. Thus the Minor proposition in this demonstration is I hope sufficiently prooued to wit that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth professedly disgrace the holy Scripture as both by their doctrine their practice and their blasphemous speeches against it doth manifestly appeare and so the conclusion is of necessary and vndeniable consequence that therefore it deserueth to be suspected and reiected of all those that professe themselues to be friends to the Scripture and hope from it either consolation in this life or saluation in the life to come MOTIVE VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintaineth commandeth and practiseth grosse and palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. WHen I consider the fearefull Idolatry of the Church of Rome which for that cause is called The Whore of Babylon and The Mother of fornications Reuel 17. 1. 2. I cannot choose but wonder that any should be so bewitched with the sorceries of this Iezabel or made drunke with the wine of her fornication that they should take her marke vpon their forheads and right hands and ioyne with her in her abominations and not rather come out of her with all speed as they are admonished by the Angell lest they bee partakers in her sinnes and haue a share also with her in her plagues but then againe remembring that which S. Paul faith that the comming of Antichrist should be in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse and that God should send vpon them strong delusion to beleeue lies I turne my wondering at their sottishnesse into the admiration at Gods Iustice and Truth the one in punishing their contempt of his Gospell with such a giddinesse of spirit and the other in making good his owne word after such an euident and manifest manner that there by it most clearely appeareth that the Pope of Rome is that Man of sinne and Sonne of perdition there spoken of euen that Antichrist which exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God and sitteth in the Temple of God as if he were God As this appeareth in many grosse errors which they hold so in none more then in the horrible idolatry practised and preached defended in this Antichristian Church of which I may truely say as Plutarch said of the heathen that they mingle heauen with earth because they made Gods of men men of Gods So these whilst they giue diuine worship to earthly creatures as the crosse pictures of Christ and to the Saints in heauen or attribute earthly affections to heauenly creatures make a plaine mixture of heauen and earth spoyling the Creatour of his honour due vnto his Dietie and adorning the creature therewith and ascribing that vnto men which is onely proper vnto God That the Church of Rome is guilty of this impiety I hope by Gods grace so to proue in this Motiue that no Iesuite though neuer so subtill shall bee able with any shew of sound reason to hisse against 2. The first proposition in this Argument though it be of so euident a truth that it needeth no further demonstration yet because S. Paul saith that an Idoll is nothing in the world and thereupon some may peraduenture conclude that Idolatrie is a matter of nothing and a small and triuiall sinne I will therefore very briefly shew the greatnesse and haynousnesse of this sinne and how odious and abominable it is in the sight of God As touching therefore that phrase of Saint Paul An Idoll is nothing it is not to bee vnderstood either in respect of matter for euery Idoll hath a materiall being and subsisting as the matter of the Calfe which the Israelites made in the Wildernesse was gold and of the brazen serpent which was abused also as an Idoll was brasse and of those Idols which the Prophet Esay declameth so against were wood nor yet in respect of forme as Bellarmine and Caietane would haue it As though the Apostle should meane thus that an Idoll though it hath matter yet it hath no forme that is to say is the representation of such a thing as hath no being in nature for many of the Idols of the Gentiles were of such things as truly were but the Apostles meaning is as Tertullian obserues and many other both of ancient and late Writers that an Idoll is nothing in respect of that which it is intended to bee that is that it is no God nor hath any part of the Diuinitie in it which deserueth to bee worshipped or that it is nothing in regard of efficacie and power that is as the Psalmist speaketh is not able to doe either good or bad to hurt or to helpe to saue or to kill and this interpretation is authorized by S. Augustine and S. Chrysostome the one saying thus There are Idols indeede but they can doe nothing neither are they Gods the other thus Sunt Idola sed ad salutem nihil sunt There are Idols but they auaile nothing to the attaynement of saluation and it is also approued by many other Expositors both ancient and moderne Protestants and Papists and is most agreeable to the whole current of the Text. This then that S. Paul saith That an Idoll is nothing is both so farre from extenuating the sinne of Idolatrie that it aggrauateth the same and also so farre from clearing the Church of Rome from the guilt of that crime that it rather layeth a greater stayne thereof vpon it 3. As for the greatnesse of the sinne it may appeare by three considerations first of the precept for there is no one commandement of the Law so frequent in the whole Scripture and so strictly vrged and mounded and fenced about with so many reasons as that is against Idolatrie as we may see in the Decalogue Secondly in respect of the punishment denounced against and inflicted vpon the committers thereof to wit not onely eternall death from the iustice of God which is the wages of all sinne vnrepented of but also temporall death from the iustice of man as being vnworthy to breathe this common ayre or to tread vpon the earth that thus sinne against the Maiestie of God and that
and secondarily it amounteth to God 53. These be Bellarmines goodly but scarce godly distinctions for these and such like as these are hee vseth as engines to vndermine the truth and as vizards to couer the face of vgly falshood But they may well bee ouerthrowne with this one blast that the holy Scripture neuer taught them neither haue they any warrant from Gods Spirit and therefore they are rather to be accounted forgeries of a frothy wit then fruits of truth But let vs examine them a little A Church is dedicated to God as it is a Temple and to a Saint as it is a Basilica Why then it seemeth that either sometimes it is a Temple and sometimes not a Temple according to the fancie of those that approach vnto it or else it is alwaies a Temple and yet alwaies a Basilica too and then the honour must be diuided betwixt God and the Saints let them take which they will the first is impiety the second Idolatry Againe for Vowes though we vow chiefly vnto God and secondarily to the Saints yet the same worship in nature is giuen to these as to him onely it is not in the same degree but Idolatry is to afford any part of Gods worship to a creature as hath beene shewed And lastly touching feast daies if they be immediately applied to the honour of the Saint and in a mediate and secondarie respect to God as his distinction importeth then the creature is adored not onely with the like worship in nature but with a higher degree then God himselfe And thus the mist which he seeketh to cast ouer mens eyes by the subtiltie of his distinctions is quickly dispelled assoone as the light of truth sheweth it selfe and therefore as Ixion imbracing a cloud in stead of Iuno beg at a monstrous off-spring so the entertaining of those cloudie distinctions without deciphering them to the quicke hath bred and doth breed most of those monstrous errors in the Church of Rome Thus we see that this outward adoration is tainted with most grosse Idolatrie 54. The second branch of their Idolatrie to the Saints is by Inuncation and Prayer directed vnto them For Prayer is a proper and peculiar part of Gods worship and therefore not to be giuen to any other besides without a plaine touch of Idolatry for the commandement of God is in the Olde Testament Call 〈…〉 of 〈…〉 not vpon my â—â—gels or my Saints but vpon 〈…〉 nd tâ—â—â— be alone is 〈…〉 inuocated the reason following declareth 〈…〉 d I will deliuer thee from whence ariseth this conclusion he alone is to be inuocated by prayer that is able to deliuer vs in the day of trouble but God alone can doe that therefore he alone is to be prayed vnto Againe it is the commandement of our Sauiour Christ in the New Testament to his whole Church that it should thus pray O our Father not O our mother nor O our brother nor O our sister nor O our fellow-seruants as the Popish Church prayeth but O our Father If there had been any necessity of praying to Saints sure our Sauiour would here haue prescribed it where he setteth downe a perfect forme of prayer to be vsed in his Church for euer Infinite be the places of Scripture â—ending to this end neither is there so much as one precept or example in the whole Booke of God that either inioyneth or approueth Inuocation of Saints as Cassander confesseth albeit his inference therevpon is absurd that therefore it may be done because as there is no mandate nor example extant to warrant it so there is no prohibition to interdict it as if it were not necessarily required that as all our actions so our prayers should bee grounded vpon faith without which it is not onely impossible to please God but also whatsoeuer we doe is sinne but saith is grounded vpon the word of God only It commeth by hearing saith the Apostle and hearing by the word of God How then can the Inuocation of Saints bee but vaine and vnprofitable yea impious and dangerous seeing it is without saith and so without all hope of Gods acceptance 55. Suarez and Salmeron two famous Iesuites confesse as much as Cassander for the one saith that we neuer reade that any directly prayed vnto the Saints departed that they should pray for them and the other that the Inuocation of Saints is not expressed in the New Testament because it would haue beene a harsh precept to the Iewes and dangerous to the Gentiles Thus here are three and those not of the meanest that acknowledge the inuocation of Saints not to bee found in Scripture And yet Bellarmine and â—â—â—ius and Coster and others 〈…〉 ashamed to â—â—est di 〈…〉 laces of Scripture to prooue it but with what impudeâ—â—y of spirit and euill successe I shall not neede to shew being sufficiently discouered by others and the very fight of them being a sufficient refutation 56. As for his reason which he braggeth to be vnanswerable me thinkes it halts of all foure for because we entreat Gods children here in this world to pray for vs doth it therefore follow that we must pray vnto them being departed out of this world By the same reason it may bee inforced that we ought to giue almes vnto them and entertaine them into our houses and wash their feete and comfort them and aduise them and preach vnto them for all these duties of charity wee performe to Saints militant If they say Why but they are remooued from vs and also from their bodies and therefore as they stand not in neede of our charity so wee cannot extend it vnto them The same answere cutteth the throte of this argument they are so farre exalted aboue vs and seuered from all commerce with our affaires that though we vsed their prayers here on earth yet it is in vaine to inuocate them in heauen our prayers as our deeds of charity being not able to stretch so farre This I take to be a sufficient solution to that vnsoluble argument Albeit we haue also another answere in readinesse to wit that there is not the same reason of the inuocation of Saints in heauen as of the mutuall prayers of Gods children on earth but a great difference here we know one anothers necessities there the Saints know not our wants here we are present with them whom we request to pray for vs but we are not present with the Saints in heauen nor they with vs and therefore the one is a fruite of charity but the other a practice of piety and religion here one liuing man may request anothers helpe by word of mouth or letter but inuocation of Saints is often performed by the secret desires of the heart without the vtterance of any speech here we stand as fellow members in our prayers and make request for each other not in our owne names but in the name of Christ our Mediatour but when men inuocate the Saints in
an effect of omnipotency Dicitur enim Deus omnipotens faciendo quod vult non patiendo quod non vult i. For God is sayd to be omnipotent by doing that which he will not by suffering that which he will not 8. From hence it must needes follow that heere can bee no miracle and that not onely because miracles are extraordinary works of God and this change of substances is ordinary in euery Sacrament as they say and miracles are not contrary but aboue or beside nature but this is flat contrary not onely to nature but to God himselfe the Authour and Creator of nature and miracles are alwaies sensible but this is insensible and cannot bee discerned by any outward meanes but also for that no miracle can imply contradiction in it selfe as this must needes doe if it were as they would haue it For when Aarons Rodde was turned into a Serpent it left to be a Rodde and when it turned into a Rodde it left to be a Serpent And when the Water was turned into Wine it left to bee Water it was impossible that it should haue beene both Water and Wine at one time in one and the same respect or a Rodde and a Serpent at once And so of all other miracles there is not one to be found that enwrappeth contradictions Besides all which Saint Augustine concludeth peremptorily that Sacraments may haue honour vt Religiosa but not amazement vt admiranda as miracles And Thomas Aquinas more plainely saith Ea quae contradictionem implioant sub diuina potentia non continentur i. Those things which imply contradiction cannot fall vnder the power of God 9. They reply that they teach no more then Cyprian did thirteeene hundred yeeres since who said that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands at the last Supper I answere that Cyprian in that place the rest of the Fathers elsewhere did often vse hyperbolicall speeches to extoll the dignity of the Sacrament and to shew the certainty and efficacy of our communion with Christ and of our spirituall eating of him but they neuer meant so as the Romanists doe that Christ bore his reall naturall substantiall body in his owne hands and gaue it to his Apostles after a fleshly manner For Cyprian expoundeth himselfe in another place when hee saith that Sacraments haue the names of those things which they signifie And Saint Augustine more plainly saith that Christ did beare himselfe in his owne hands after a sort If it had beene really and substantially what neede hee haue added after a sort for this word as they vse to speake in Schooles is Terminus diminutiuus qui realitati vbique detrahit A diminitiue terme which detracteth from the realtie and true being of a thing And this speech Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands after a sort is all one with that in another place After a certaine manner the Sacrament of Christs body is Christs body So that it is playne that when the Fathers said Christ bore himselfe in his owne hands they meant nothing but that he bore in his hands the Sacrament of himselfe and thus this first contradiction is irreconciliable I come to a second and that in the Sacrament which is no lesse palpable 10. It is a principle of their Religion and of the truth it selfe that Christ after his resurrection ascended into heauen and there filleth a place and hath figure forme and disposition of parts and is circumscribed within a certaine compasse according to the nature of a body This is Bellarmines owne assertion and it is consonant to sound doctrine confirmed both by manifest Scripture and vniforme consent of ancient Fathers for Scripture Christ is said to bee like vnto vs and not barely like but like in all things that is both in nature and in the qualities and quantities of nature And to put the matter out of doubt onely one thing is excepted wherin he is not like vnto vs and that is Sinne whereby he is absolutely left to bee like vnto vs in all other things And lest any should thinke that that was true onely whilst he was here vpon earth the Apostle in the forenamed places applyeth it to him being in heauen for hee saith Wee haue not an High-priest which cannot be touched with our infirmities and therefore let vs boldly goe vnto the throne of grace where the Apostles argument were of no force if he were like vnto vs here on earth onely in the state of his humilitie and not also now being in heauen in the state of glory for sinfull man might thus reply True Christ was like our nature whilst he liued amongst vs but now being glorified he hath put off our nature and therefore we dare not presume to come vnto him Yes saith the Apostle he is still like vnto vs and hath not put off our nature but the infirmities of our nature onely which were the sequels of sinne as we also shall doe when we shall be translated into heauen after the resurrection And this Saint Luke more plainely auoucheth when he saith that after he had blessed them he departed from them and was carryed vp into heauen and that whilst they beheld he was taken vp by a cloude out of their sight Where we see plainely a locall motion of Christ from earth to heauen and therefore there must needs be of him a locall situation in the heauens As also Saint Peter in expresse words doeth affirme when he saith that the heauens must containe or receiue him vntill the time of restauration of all things Thus this doctrine is consonant to holy Scripture 11. Now let vs see how it was entertayned by the ancient Fathers thus they write Athanasius When Christ said I goe to the Father he spake of the humane nature which hee haed assumed for it is the propertie of him to goe and come who is circumscribed with certaine limits of places and forsaking that place where it was commeth to the place where it was not Nazianzene saith Wee professe one and the same Lord passible in the flesh impossible in his Godhead circumscribed in body vncircumscribed in deity the same both earthly and heauenly visible and inuisible comprehended in place and not comprehended Againe Christ as man is circumscribed and contayned in place Christ as God is vncircumscribed and contayned within no place Augustine saith Christ as man according to his body is in a place but as God filleth all places Cyril saith Though Christ hath taken from hence the presence of his body yet in the maiestie of his deitie hee is alwayes present Fulgentius saith One and the same Christ a locall Man of a Woman his mother who is the infinite God of God his Father Vigilius the Martyr Christ is in all places according to the nature of his deitie but is contayned in one place according to the nature of his humanity Damascene The difference of natures
Prophet Esay saying Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a sure foundation which is a playne and manifest Prophecie of Christ and not of Peter as the Apostle Peter himselfe expoundeth it where by the way we may note the feareful outrage of these Romish Rabbies against the truth of God and the God of truth whilst to the end they may aduance their Popes dignity by Peter they wrest and peruert the Scriptures and apply the Prophecies belonging to the Sonne of God to his seruant Peter and so make Peter himselfe nay the holy Ghost a Lyar. It were not credible that such blasphemous thoughts and words should nestle in the heart and issue out of the mouth of any but that the Apostle Saint Paul hath fore-told vs that in the time of Antichrist because men would not receiue the loue of the truth that they might be saued therefore God would send them strong delusions that they should beleeue lyes c. But to the point If Christs person be the onely true foundation of the Church in whom all the building being coupled together groweth vnto an holy Temple in the Lord and that not the persons but the doctrine and faith of the Apostles are those secundary foundations which the Scripture speaketh of as hath beene proued out of the Fathers then the opposition is vndefeasible namely that there is but one person the foundation of our Church which is our Lord and Sauiour the Sonne of God Christ Iesus and yet that Peters person should be the foundation of the Church also together with Christ 45. Thirdly I answere that both in truth and also in proprietie of speech there can bee but one foundation of one building those stones that are layd next to the foundation are not properly a secundary foundation but the beginning of the building vpon the foundation and for that cause when Peter and the rest of the Apostles are called twelue foundations it cannot bee vnderstood that they were any wayes properly foundations of the Church either first or second but that our Sauiour who is the substance and subiect of their doctrine is the onely true and singular foundation of the Church and that there is none other besides him for if when it is said that we are built vpō the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles as must needes bee because the Prophets are coupled together with the Apostles which liued not in the Christian Church and therefore could not be personall foundations of it and Christ crucified is the substance of their doctrine then it must needes follow that the Apostles meaning is nothing else but that we are built vpon Christ whom the Prophets and the Apostles preached and beleeued in And thus S. Hilary vnderstood it and Saint Ambrose and Anselmus who giuing the foundation of the Church to Peter expoundeth it sometimes of his faith in Christ and sometimes of Christ himselfe in whom he beleeued And thus doe also Salmeron the Iesuite and Cardinall Caietane in their commentaries vpon that place and Peter Lumbard together with the glosse vpon the place interpret And so this distinction of a primary and secundary foundation hath no foundation in the word of God 46. The Gospell teacheth that no Apostle or Bishop or other Minister of the Gospell is superiour to another of the same ranke or hath greater power and authority then another in respect of their ministerie but that all Ministers in their seuerall degrees haue equall power of preaching the Gospell administring the Sacraments binding and loosing But the Bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and ouer the whole Church and braggeth that he hath by right a title to both the swords both spirituall and temporall and that both iurisdictions doe originally pertaine to him and from him are conueyed to others c. 47. Bellarmine heere first confesseth and secondly distinguisheth hee confesseth that the Bishop of Rome hath a supreme power ouer all other Bishops and the whole Church and denyeth that eyther those places here quoted or any other doe prooue the contrary 48. To which I answere first that whereas out of Luke 22. 26. and 1. Cor. 3. 4. he extracteth a disparity and an inequality I answere that no man denyeth it and therefore he fighteth with his owne shadow hee should prooue not a bare superiority which wee confesse but a superiority in the same degree as of one Bishop to another and that in power not in execution wherein standeth the point of opposition 49. Secondly whereas he saith that though the power of remitting and retayning finnes and binding and loosing was communicated to all the Apostles yet Peter was ordayned chiefe Pastor ouer them all because our Sauiour Christ sayd vnto him alone Feede my sheepe and To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen I answere that in this hee crosseth both himselfe the Fathers and the truth himselfe for elsewhere hee confesseth that the keyes both of Order and Iurisdiction were giuen to all the Apostles indifferently and therefore it must needes follow that Tibi dabo claues was not spoken singularly to Peter but generally to them all for if Christ gaue the keyes to them all as he confesseth then without doubt he promised them to them all or else his word and his deede should not accord together And againe hee acknowledgeth that all the Apostles had both power and commission to feede the sheepe of Christ when Mat. 28. he bade them all Goe teach and baptize and they all did put that commission in execution therefore it must needes follow that no singular power was giuen to Peter when as Christ said vnto him Feede my sheepe vnlesse we will say that the rest had not the same commission 50. The Fathers for Saint Cyprian saith plainely that all the Apostles were the same with Peter indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power and that a primary was giuen vnto Peter that the Church might appeare to be one Saint Hilary is of the same minde You O holy and blessed men saith he for the merit of your faith haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and obtained a right to binde and loose in Heauen and earth Saint Augustine saith that if when Christ said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen he spake onely to Peter then the Church hath not the power of the keyes but if the Church hath it then Peter receiuing the keyes represented the Church And lastly Leo one of their owne Popes confesseth asmuch when hee affirmeth that the strength of this power of the keyes passed vnto all the Apostles and the constitution of this decree vnto all the Princes of the Church 51. Lastly the truth for when the Apostles stroue for superiority Christ who is truth it selfe and would not haue concealed so necessary a trueth if
sentences heere and there that see me to make for their purpose contrary to the whole scope and drift of the writer or lastly by blemishing our whole Religion by some sinister or exorbitant opinion maintained by some one or other vnaduised fellow though it bee contrary to the whole current of all other writers on our side as if for one mans errour wee were all flat Heretikes or because one souldier playeth the dastard therefore the whole army were cowards These bee their tricks of Legerdemaine by which they indeuour to disgrace our Religion and to countenance their owne but Veritas magna est preualebit I hope so to dispell and scatter these mists by the light of truth that they shall vanish like smoake and the truth bee more resplendent like the Sunne comming out of a cloud 61. To the purpose first they exclaime that our Religion is an enemy to good workes and that wee esteeme of them as not necessary to saluation which damnable errour some of them ascribe vnto vs as our direct doctrine others as a consequence of our doctrine and our secret meaning but that both are lying slanders I appeal first to our doctrine it selfe which is so cleare in this point that no man can doubt thereof but hee that is musled with malice for this we hold that though faith be alone in the worke of iustification yet that saith euer worketh through loue and is great with good workes as a woman with child which it bringeth forth also when occasion serueth and that if it bee disioyned from good workes it is but a dead carkas of faith yea the faith of Deuils and hypocrites and not of the elect And this as it is the constant doctrine of all our diuines so is it principally of Luther whom our aduersaries accuse as the chiefest enemy to good workes for thus hee writeth in one place touching the efficacy of faith Faith is a liuely and powerfull thing not an idle cogitation swimming vpon the toppe of the heart as a fowle vpon the water but as water heated by fire though it remaine water still yet it is no more cold but hote and altogether changed so faith doth frame and fashion in a man another mind and other senses and altogether maketh him a new man Again in another place he sayth that the vertue of faith is to kill death to damne hell to be sinne to sinne and a deuill to the deuill that is to be sins poison and the Deuils confusion Thus hee speaketh concerning the powerful efficacy of that true iustifying faith which wee rely our saluation vpon and they condemne as a nulli-fidian portion And touching good works their necessity and excellency heare how diuinely he writeth in one place Out of the cause of iustification no man can sufficiently commend good workes in another One good worke proceeding from faith done by a Christian is more pretious then heauen or earth the whole world is not able to giue a sufficient reward for one goodworke and in another place It is as necessary that godly teachers doe as diligently vrge the doctrine of good workes as the doctrine of faith for the Deuill is an enemy to both what can bee spoken more effectually for the extolling of the excellency of good wâ—rkesâ— and yet these fellowes make Luther the greatest aduersarie to them 62. Secondly I appeale to themselues many of the greatest Doctors amongst whom doe cleare vs from that imputation Maldonate The Protestants doe say that iustifying faith cannot bee without good workes Viega The Protestants affirme that iustification sanctification are so ioyned together that they cannot be parted Stapleton All Protestants none excepted teach that faith which iustifieth is liuely working by charity and other good workes Lastly Bellarmine The Protestants say that faith cannot stand with euill workes for hee that hath a purpose to sin can conceiue no faith for the remission of his sin and that faith alone doth iustifie but yet is not alone and that they exclude not the necessity but onely the merite of good workes nor the presence but the efficacy to iustifie Now then with what face can they bolster out this slaunder against our doctrine and accuse vs to be like the Simonian Heretike who taught that a man need not regard good workes and Eunomians who defended that perseuerance in sinne did not hinder saluation so that wee beleeued This is the first blasphemie against our Religion wherein they doe not so much thwart vs as crosse themselues and that one may see yet more clearely this to bee a malicious slaunder hearken what Bellarmine sayth concerning Luthers opinion of Christian liberty Luther seemeth sayth he to teach that Christian liberty consisteth in this that a godly conscience is free not from doing good workes but from being accused or defended by them let Luther himself speake againe By faith sayth he we are freed not from works but from opinion of workes that is from a foolish presumption of iustification to bee obtained by workes by all which we may easily iudge of the meaning of those sentences obiected Faith alone doth saue and infidelity alone doth condemne and where faith is no sinne can hurt nor condemne that they are to be vnderstood partly of sinnes before iustification and partly of such sinnes after as destroy not faith nor raigne in the beleeuer nor are perseuered in but repented of and laboured against and thus our Religion is iustified by the very aduersaries thereof from this great crime imputed vnto it 63. Againe they accuse vs as maintainers of this doctrine that all the workes of iust men are mortall sinnes and of this they make Luther Calume and Melancthon to be Patrones but with what shamelesse impudency let the world iudge To begin with Caluine these be his words Dum sancti ductu Spiritus c. i. Whilst being holy wee walke in the wayes of the Lord yet least being forgetfull of our selues wee should waxe proud there remain reliques of imperfection which may minister vnto vs matter of humiliation againe the best worke that can be wrought by iust men yet is besprinkled and corrupted with the impurity of the flesh and hath as it were some dregs mixed with it let the holy seruant of God chuse out of his whole life that which he shall thinke to haue beene most excellent let him well consider euery part thereof hee shall without doubt finde in one place or other something which sauours of the fleshes corruption seeing our alacrity in well doing is neuer such as it ought to be but our weakenes great in hindering the course although we see that the blots where with the Saints workes are stayned are not obscure yet grant that they are but very small workes shall they not offend the eyes of God before whom the starres themselues are not pure we haue not one worke proceeding from the Saints which if it be censured
assertion that God can not make those things that bee done to be vndone doth not destroy but build vp the omnipotency of God seing as Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth Facere contradictoria non est efficere sed deficere to doe things contradictorie is not to effect and doe but to faile and vndoe and therefore an argument of impotency rather then of omnipotency and for that cause Pererius another Iesuite auoucheth the same doctrine with vs in these words God is said to be omnipotent not onely because he can do whatsoeuer is contained in the world but also because nothing is impossible vnto him except that which to be done implieth contradiction what an impudent flander then is this to say that wee deny Gods omnipotency by affirming that hee cannot make that to bee vndone which is done especially seeing wee say further with Tertullian and Saint Augustine that therefore God cannot do it because he will not do it he cannot therefore deny himselfe not make that to be vndone which is done because hee will not and he will not because it would rather be an argument of weakenes then a power in him so to doe 76. Againe they challenge Caluine of denying the immortality of the soule And why thinke you Because they would make him to say that the soules of the iust are kept in certaine secret receptacles till the day of Iudgement and doe not till then inioy the presence of God Another palpable slander for first Caluine doth not say so secondly if hee did yet it doth not follow thereupon that hee denyeth the immortality of the soule for the first let Caluine first speake for himselfe and then let his aduersaries also speak for him Touching the place where the soules of the iust remaine after death he affirmeth plainely in diuers places that they liue with God and enioy the happy felicity of his kingdome though their perfect happinesse is deferred till the second comming of Christ when their bodies and soules shal be re-united and made partakers of the same blessednes This he testifieth not in one or two but in many places how therefore can they lay to his charge that opinion touching secret receptacles where soules are reserued till the day of the resurrection 77. Mary sayth Bellarmine in two respects first because he maketh Christ alone to haue entred into the Sanctuary of heauen and there to present the prayers of the people resting in the vtter court to God secondly because he sayth that the Saints departed are ioyned together with vs by faith therefore sayth Bellarmine He must needs deny that they see God seeing where faith is there is not sight But his conclusion in both is false though the premises be true for as the Atrium or vtter Court of the Temple to which Caluine alludeth was a part of the Temple so by proportion the vtter Court of Heauen is a part of Heauen witnesse their owne Ribera expounding that place of Exodus whereunto Caluine alludeth and therefore Caluine if hee did say so doth not banish the iust soules out of Heauen but onely placeth Christ our high Priest betwixt God and them But what if hee speake onely of the Saints liuing and not departed and meane by the vtter Court not any part of Heauen but the Church militant heere on earth If this be true what shamelesse slaunderers are these fellowes to wring a sense out of Caluine whereof there is no show in the words let the place be consulted and viewed and their malice and impudency will appeare most notorious 78. Againe that faith which hee speaketh of in the second place is nothing else but their stedfast beliefe and expectation of the resurrection of their bodies which liueth in the faithfull soules separated from this mortality vntill the full accomplishment of their happinesse aswell as in the Saints militant neither can I conceiue any absurdity in this that the Saints departed should haue faith in this respect seeing they must needs haue hope which two Theologicall vertues are so perplexed together that one cannot bee without the other and therefore Clemens Alexandrinus calleth hope the blood of faith and Saint Paul sayth 1. Cor. 13. that faith and hope shall cease together when charity shall suruiue and remaine If then the Saints departed hope for the resurrection of their bodies why may they not bee said also to beleeue it and yet for all that be in heauen too 79. Neither is the other place obiected out of Caluine by Bellarmine any whit repugnant to this doctrine for though he sayth that it is a foolish and rash part to dispute curiously what the place is that the Saints possesse in Heauen and whether they inioy the full ioyes of heauen or no yet in the very same place hee affirmeth that they are in the presence of Christ in Paradise and that they onely expect the fruition of that promised glory which their bodies also shal be possessors of at the comming of Christ 80. Thus we haue heard Caluine speake for himselfe Let vs now heare his enemies speaking for him in this case then which there cannot be a stronger argument of his innocency and in this two may stand for all Bellarmine is the first hee directly confesseth that Caluine placed the soules of the Saints in heauen euen before the comming of Christ and to him subscribeth Fenardentius another Iesuite who affirmeth that this was Caluines opinion that the faithfull when they should depart out of this world doe behold God neere vnto them and as it were set before their eyes And thus Caluine is quit from this enditement by the witnesse of his profest aduersaries 81. Secondly let it be granted which neuerthelesse can no wayes be prooued that Caluine held this opinion touching the residence of soules in some secret place yet it doth not follow that therefore he denyed the immortality of the soule For then Origen Iustine Martyr Tertullian Irenaeus Lactantius Victorinus Chrysostome Theodoret Theophilact Ambrose Bernard and diuers others of the ancient godly Fathers should be enwrapped within the same errour who all held that opinion touching soules departed and yet were as farre from gain-saying or once imagining any opposition to the soules immortality as these backbiting Shemiâ—s are from charity and truth 82. Another lowde and lewde slander of theirs against our Religion is that it maintaineth and warranteth rebellion and disobedience against lawfull Princes Which if they could prooue wee would confesse that our Religion was naught seeing Gods word commandeth euery soule to be subiect to the higher powers but yet not worse then theirs which is without all contradiction guilty of this crime which they impute vnto vs as hath beene prooued but let vs heare their proofes they are of two sorts first from the doctrines of some of our learned writers and secondly from the practice of our professors In the first kind they obiect Caluine Beza Luther Knox Buchanan
iudgement because there must be by their doctrine aswell contrition in heart as confession in the mouth or else no pardon can follow but a Priest cannot discerne of the heart Nay further many if not most of their Romish shauelings are vnable to iudge of the nature and qualitie of sin much more of the quantitie and degrees thereof so consequently can neither impose a iust or proportionable satisfaction without which no releasement nor make the partie vnderstand the ease hee standeth in that hee may take vpon himselfe voluntarie penance or if need bee purchase indulgence from the Pope In all which respects it is danger to trust our soules vpon such a slipperie foundation but hee that confesseth to God his sinnes and expecteth pardon at his hand onely is sure that hee discerneth the secrets of the heart and that he shutteth and no man openeth and openeth and no man shutteth and therefore if hee absolue though all the World condemne hee is on a sure ground and if hee condemne though all the World acquite hee is in a miserable case In this doctrine there is no vncertainty but strong comfort to the penitent sinner and terrour of conscience to the obstinate and vnrepentant 30. If they say that the absolution of a Priest is certaine vnlesse there bee a barre in him that confesseth because our Sauiour saith Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted and whosoeuers sinnes yee retaine they are retained I answer that first de facto the Priest may erre but God cannot Secondly he cannot choose but erre in absoluing if the penitent doe erre in confessing which hee is verie likely to doe and thirdly that when God purposeth to absolute a sinner no barie can hinder the performance thereof yea hee infuseth grace into his soule to hate his sinne and power to forsake it Is it not better then to trust vnto God then to man and safer to confesse our sinnes to him that hath absolute power to pardon them then to a Priest whose pardon depends vpon the vncertaintie of a mans true confession These things be so cleare that no reasonable man can doubt of the truth of them 31. Lastly confession to God hath manifest and vndeniable grounds in holy Scripture but auricular Romish confession to a Priest is by the iudgement of their greatest Clarkes taken vp onely by a tradition of the Church and not by any authoritie of the olde and new Testament witnesse their Canon Law Panormitane Peresius Petrus Oxoniensis Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus with many more and though the new Iesuites and Rhemists auouch the contrarie yet they but therein crosse their fellowes as learned and wise as themselues and yet are not able to alleadge any one direct proofe of their opinion Now is it not a safer practice to build vpon Scripture then tradition that is vpon God then man And to chuse that kind of confession which no man doubteth to be warranted from God rather then that which the Patrones thereof themselues are at variance from whom it commeth who that hath eyes seeth not which of these is rather to be chosen 32. Touching Purgatorie it breedeth diuers dangerous consequences as to their holy Pope first who taketh vpon him to haue plenarie power ouer all creatures especially ouer the soules in Purgatorie which the Canonists call peculium Papae the Popes peculiar for it proueth him eyther to bee a lying Prophet or a cruell Tyrant if hee haue full power ouer them why doth hee let so many thousand poore soules lye frying there without release His suffering them to continue in that cruell torment argueth him either to want power to relieue them or mercie to put that power in execution both which are vnbeseeming qualities for Christs Vicar If they reply against this as Antoninus doth and say that in respect of his absolute Iurisdiction he may absolue all that are in Purgatorie but if we regard the orderly execution thereof in that respect the Pope may not nor ought so to doe I say againe But why ought hee not if it bee in his power is it for feare to fill Heauen too soone with Saints but that would be a great blessing for then the consummation of all things would the sooner come or is it for feare lest the iustice of God should be fully satisfied by a proportionable punishment But the Popes indulgence can helpe that for hee hath in his Treasure-house such a surplussage of Saints merits that can serue to make good whatsoeuer is wanting in their behalfe and the Pope by their doctrine hath authoritie to dispence dispose of these merits at his discretion Or is it for feare lest purgatorie should bee emptied and so hee should lose one part of his Kingdome But our Sauiour contented himselfe with heauen and earth to be vnder him and his dominion and Saint Paul attributes to his regiment things vnder earth that is in hell and wil his Vicar needs haue a larger dominion then his Master But indeed this is the true reason For if hee should make a goale deliuerie out of this infernall prison then his chiefest sway were gone yea and his reuenue too It stands vpon him therefore not to bee pleased to deliuer any out of these paines vnlesse he bee well pleased for his paines and if hee bee so then the soules shall flye out of that place to heauen in whole troupes as they say they did at the Prayer of a certaine holy man c. In their leaden Legend this danger lighteth vpon the head of their head the Pope which according to their doctrine can by no meanes be auoided it were better then for him to forgoe his profit which ariseth by purgatorie then to vndergoe such foule discredit 33. Another dangerous consequence ariseth hencefrom to all the professors of Religion in generall that is a feareful presumption and securitie of sinning when they are perswaded that after this life they may be released from the paines of purgatorie by the prayers almesdeeds Masses and other meritorious workes of the liuing for who would bee afraid to sinne or carefull to make his saluation sure in this life with feare and trembling when hee beleeueth that by giuing a summe of monie at his death for Masses and dirges to be sung for his soule he shall be certainly deliuered out of purgatory This must needs cast men into manifest presumption if not of all sinnes yet of veniall sinnes and ordinarie offences which are to be purged by that fire as they teach Is not our doctrine more sound and safe that informeth vs that such as die in their sinnes sinke downe to the lowest Hell as hopelesse after death to bee relieued by anything that can bee done for their sakes by the liuing doth not this teach men betimes to bee wise and to finish vp the worke of their saluation before the night come and make their peace with God whilest they are here in the way of
it is Romish is not the true Catholique Religion of CHRIST but the seduction of Antichrist THE PREAMBLE THat which Ireneus an ancient and godly Father of the Church speaketh of all Heretickes that all the Helleborus in the world is not sufficient to purge them that they may vomit out their follie may truely be spoken of the Church of Rome and her adherents that it is a difficult matter if not almost impossible to reclaime her from her errors and to heale her wounds All the balme of Gilead will not do it nor all the spirituall phisicke that can be ministred for there are two sinnes which of all other are most hard to bee relinquished Whoredome and Drunkennesse the one because it is so familiar and naturall to the flesh the other because it breedeth by custome such an vnquenchable thirst in the stomacke as must euer anon be watered with both which spirituall diseases the Church of ROME is infected She is the Whore of Babylon with whome the Kings of the Earth haue committed fornication and who hath made drunke with the Wine of her fornications all the Inhabitants of the Earth In regard of the first Ieremie prophecied of her that though paines be taken to heale her yet shee could not be healed And in regard of the second Saint Paul prophecied that GOD would send them strong delusion that they should beleeue lies that all they might bee damned that receiued not the loue of the truth Notwithstanding though the hope bee as little of the reclaiming of most of them as of turning an Eunuch into a man or making a blacke Moore white yet I haue propounded in this discourse a strong potion compounded of ingredients which if they bee not past cure may purge and cleanse them of their disease and reduce them to the sanity of Christian Religion Which if their queasie stomackes shall eyther refuse to take or hauing taken shall vomit vp againe and not suffer them to worke vpon their consciences yet this benefit will arise that God shall be glorified the truth manifested and all that loue the truth confirmed and they also themselues that are so drowned in error that they will rather pull in others ouer head and eares vnto them and so drowne together then be drawne out of the myre by any helpe shall be conuinced in their consciences of their most grosse apostacie With this confidence towards Gods glorie and the good of his Church though with little hope of recouering them from their obdurate blindnesse I enter into my intended taske desiring the Lord to giue a blessing to these poore labours which I consecrate to my Lord and Master Iesus Christ whom I serue and the Church his Spouse of which I professe my selfe to bee one of the meanest members MOTIVE I. That Religion which in many points giueth libertie to sinne is not the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of ROME ergo c. THe first proposition is an vndoubted truth and needs no confirmation especially seeing S. Iames describeth true Religion by these attributes pure and vndefiled And S. Paul calleth it the mysterie of godlinesse and the doctrine according to godlinesse And herein consisteth an essentiall difference betwixt the true Religion and all false ones so that it must needs follow that that Religion which is essentially the cause and occasion of sinne and openeth a wide window to vngodlinesse cannot be the truth of God but must needs fetch it beginning from the deuill who is the author of all euill The Gospell indeede may by accident be the occasion of euill as S. Paul saith The law is the occasion of sinne for it stirs vp contention and strife and discouers the corruptions of Mans heart and by opposing against them as a damme against a streame makes them to swell and boyle and burst forth beyond the bounds howbeit here the cause is not in the Gospell or Lawe but in the corruption of mans heart which the more it is stirred the more it rageth and striueth to shew it selfe But neuer yet was the doctrine of godlinesse the cause of wickednesse nor the pure and vndefiled Religion of Christ Iesus an essentiall procurer and prouoker vnto sinne 3. This therefore being thus manifest all the question and difficultie remaineth in the second proposition to wit that the Religion of the Romish Church is such as openeth a gappe vnto sinne and giueth notorious libertie and scope to vngodlinesse and that not by way of accident or occasion but necessarily as the cause to the effect Qua data necessariò soquitur effectus as the Logicians speake and therefore being an â—npure and defiled Religion and the mysterie of iniquitie not the mysterie of godlinesse it cannot be that true Religion which Christ our Sauiour brought with him from heauen and left here vpon earth blamelesse and vnspotted like himselfe to be the way to lead vs vnto heauen where hee is 4. That the Romish Religion is a polluted and defiled Religion tending to libertie and loosenesse Let the indifferent Reader iudge by these few instances deriued out of the verie bowels of their Church and being articles of their faith and grounds of their Religion And first to beginne with their doctrine of dispensations whereby they teach that the Pope hath power to dispense with the word of God and with euery commandement of the Law and not onely with the Law but with the Gospell and Epistles of Paul to what horrible loosenesse and lewdnesse of life doth it tend for to omit that it containeth in it open blasphemie by their owne rule which is that In praecepto superioris non debet dispensare inferior the inferiour may not dispense with the precept of the superiour by which the Pope dispensing with Gods lawe is not oneâ—y equalled but exalted aboue God what sinne is there bee it neuer so hainous which there is not libertie giuen to commit by this licencious doctrine 5. Incest But Pope Martin the first gaue a dispensation to one to marrie his owne sister and not his wiues sister only as some of the Romish crue would dawbe ouer this filthie wall because it is in Antoninus Cum quadam eius germana for Siluester Prieriâ— Bartholomeus Fumus and Angelus de Clauafio speake more plainely Cumsua germana that is with his owne naturall sister Another Pope dispensed with Henry the eight to marrie his sister in law and with Philip of Spaine to marrie his owne Niece and Clement the 7. licenced Petrus Aluaradus the Spaniard to marrie two sisters at once and no maruaile seeing it is the very doctrine of the Romish Church that the Pope can dispense in all the degrees of Consanguinitie and Affinitie saue onely with the Father and his daughter and with the Mother and her Son Sodometrie But Pope Sixtus the fourth licensed the Cardinall of Saint Lucie and his familie to vse freely that sinne not to bee named in the
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
God that hee cannot doe all these things by himselfe without them but rather of his omnipotencie in that hee was not onely able to doe these things himselfe but also to giue power to those creatures to doe them so it is an argument of greater power in Christs merits to giue strength to our workes to merit heauen then if hee did it for vs without our workes I but by Bellarmines leaue that I may speake with all humble reuerence to the diuine Maiestie the power of God had beene more manifest and his omnipotencie more conspicuous I doe not say had beene greater if he should doe these things immediatly by himselfe then it is by the glasse of the creatures As when the Lord came downe in person vpon mount Sinai and gaue the children of Israel the law from his owne mouth his glory was more famous and fearefull then when hee sent it them after by the hand of Moses though written with his owne finger as the other was spoken with his owne mouth And therefore it is said Exod. 20. that the people were so astonished at Gods voyce that they desired that hee would speake no more vnto them in his owne person but by his seruant Moses Adde herevnto that God in his wisedome ordayned those creatures to that end and purpose and therefore we must not dispute as Bellarmine doth whether it should haue beene a greater token of his omnipotencie if hee had or if hee had not created them but humbly submit our selues to his wisedome knowing that his thoughts are not like ours nor his counsels like ours but as the heauens are higher then the earth so are his wayes higher than ours and his thought aboue our thoughts but for the merits of Christ he hath reuealed in his word that in them onely wee are to finde saluation and therefore wee must beleeue that he is most glorified by that doctrine which teacheth vs to rely onely vpon them and as for the power in them to cause vs to merit it is no where to be found in Scripture and therefore not to be thought to be for the aduancement of his glory besides to say that Christs honour is encreased by mans merit is plaine blasphemie for who hath giuen any thing to God Rom. 11. 25. He standeth not in neede of our good decdes Psal 16. 2. Indeede we doe glorifie God by our good workes but that is not by encreasing but by publishing and proclaiming of his glory but the Romanists say that the glory of Christs merits is augmented by our merits which must needes be a most blasphemous speech In a word seeing we doe not finde in Scripture that Christ died to giue merit to our workes but to purchase pardon to our sinnes and obtaine life for vs wee must bee content to thinke that this serueth most for his glorie and that the contrarie is derogatory thereunto 35. Lastly where did we euer read that wee must be like vnto Christ in meriting we read that wee must bee holy as he is holy and humble and meeke as hee was humble and meeke and patient as he was patient to wit in quality not in quantity in imitation not in perfection but to merit as he did is no where to be found nay it is a thing impossible for it is an infinite and omnipotent worke of righteousnesse that can deserue any thing at the infinite iustice of the omnipotent God and it must bee of infinite valew that can purchase that infinite reward And therefore it was necessarie that he which should be our Redeemer should also be God because neither Angell nor Archangell nor any creature else could performe a worke of that price which might be sufficient to merit the kingdome of heauen It is therefore a most grosse blasphemie to say that we must be like vnto Christ in the point of meriting for it maketh euery man a Iesus that is a Sauiour and Redeemer to himselfe Therefore to conclude I say with S. Bernard Let the glory remaine to the Lord vntouched he hath triumphed ouer the enemie alone he hath freed the captiues alone hee hath fought and conquered alone and with S. Augustine To whom we are endebted for that we are to him we are endebted that wee are iustified let none attribute to God his being and to himselfe his iustifying for it is better which thou giuest to thy selfe than that which thou giuest vnto God thou giuest the lower thing vnto God and the higher to thy selfe giue all to him praise him in all This wee doe by our doctrine and they the contrary and therefore it is most manifest that by this doctrine of theirs mans glory is exalted and Christs defaced mans merits lifted vp and Christs pulled downe which cannot stand with the truth and sincerity of Christian Religion 36. The fourth doctrine which tendeth directly to the dishonor of God the abasing of Christs glory in the worke of our redemption is their paradox of humane satisfactions by which they teach that Christ by his death hath made satisfaction for the guilt of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie the iustice of God for the temporall punishment either in earth or in Purgatory whereas we on the contrary teach and beleeue that by Christs death and passion a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction is made to the iustice of God for all the sinnes of men and for all the punishment thereof both eternall and temporall As for our doings or sufferings we acknowledge the one to be sabordinately required as fruites of our faith and the other necessary to be sustained as meanes of our mortification And touching offences against our brethren we hold it necessary that we make satisfaction to such whom we haue wronged any wayes either by confession restitution or punishment as the case shall require yea wee acknowledge that a Canonicall or Ecclesiasticall satisfaction is to be made to the Church or any part thereof when as we haue giuen iust scandall and offence there vnto But in all these wee denie that there is any vertue or power to expiate our sinnes or to make satisfaction to God for the punishment thereof either temporall or eternall that to do is only proper and peculiar to the Crosse of Christ for as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punishments but also temporall so the obedience and merit of the second Adam hath made satisfaction to God for both 37. And herein we agree both with the holy Scripture in many expresse places as 1. Iohn 2. 2. He is the propitiation for our sinnes And Rom. 5. 18. For the eternall punishment of them And Esay 53. 4. For the temporall for there it is said that he tooke vpon him our infirmities and bore our sicknesses And with the holy Fathers for Saint Augustine plainly affirmeth That temporal afflictions before forgiuenes are the punishments of sin but after forgiuenes
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
vnderstanding by the Aspe and Cockatrice Lyon and Dragon the Emperour Frederick vpon whose necke hee set his foote vsing those words and all other Kings and Emperours and to proue that he so vnderstood the place when as the Emperor disdayning this pride made answere Not to thee but to Peter the holy Father treading on his necke replied Et mihi Petro Both to mee and to Peter Which storie though it bee branded by Baronius with the marke of a fable yet it is auouched by a full Iurie of witnesses and especially two Gennadius the Patriarke of Constantinople and a Venetian Historian that liued about that time which last onely differeth in the Popes alledging of the Text for he makes the Pope to say not in the second person thou but ambulabo I will walke vpon the Lion and the Adder Againe they interpret that place of Esay 49. 23. They shall worship towards the face of the earth and licke the dust of thy feete as a Prophecie of the Popes sublimitie For saith Turrian the Iesuite Where is this verified but in the kissing of the feete of the Bishop of Rome and yet who knoweth not that this is nothing else but a manifest prediction of the glory of the Church and the conuersion and subiection of Kings and Princes to the Religion of Christ What a wresting of Scripture call you this Are not these strange interpretations 25. But yet heare them which are more strange and ridiculous In the 28. of Esay 16. verse wee read Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation This all know being taught by the interpretation of S. Peter 1. Pet. 2. 6. is to be vnderstood of Christ only and none other yet Bellarmine vnderstands by this tried precious corner stone not Christ but Peter that is as he saith Sedes Romana The Roman Sea Againe we read Iere. 26. 14. Behold I am in your hands doe with mee as you thinke good and right This Text Bonauenture alledgeth to proue that Christ is in the Priests hands at the Masse as a Prisoner not to bee let goe till he haue payd his ransome that is till he haue giuen remission of sinnes contrary to the manifest sense of the place Hosea 1. 11. We read that the children of Iudah and Israel shall be gathered together and appoint themselues one head answerable to that Ioh. 10. 16. There shall be one fold and one shepheard which places properly appertayning to Christ and his Church are ordinarily and blasphemously alledged to proue that the Pope is the head of the Church Againe Cant. 5. 11. His head is as fine gold And Cant. 7. 5. Thy head is like the mount Carmel One of which is the speech of the Church to Christ and the other of Christ to the Church but Bellarmine interprets the first to be spoken Christ and the second of the Pope These be his words The Bridegrome compareth the head of his Spouse to mount Carmel because though the Pope be a great mountaine yet he is nothing but earth that is a man and the Bride compareth the Bridegromes head to the best gold because the head of Christ is God 26. But let vs come a little to the new Testament are they any thing more shie and cautelous in this then in the olde Heare and then iudge Matth. 28. 18. our Sauiour saith to his Disciples All power is giuen vnto me in heauen and earth This in the booke of Ceremonies is expounded of the Pope and also by Stephen the Archbishop of Patauy in the Councill of Laterane Luc. 22. 38. the Apostles say vnto Christ Behold two swords and he answered It is sufficient By this place of Scripture Boniface the eighth challenged to himselfe both temporall and ecclesiasticall authority because Christ said two swords were sufficient and bade Peter not cast away one of them but put it vp into the sheath This exposition flat contrary to the meaning of the Text was not only deuised by a Pope but also approued by Bellarmine and Molina the Iesuite and Balbus with diuers others though I confesse reiected by Stella Maldonate and Arias Montanus But what are these to a Pope that cannot erre and to such an Emminent Cardinall as Bellarmine is So likewise they expound that Text Matth. 17. 24. Solue pro te me Pay for thee and me To signifie that Christs family hath two heads to wit Christ and Peter because they two onely payd and that Peter was chiefe ouer the rest of the Apostles because none of the rest payd as if paying of tribute was a signe of preeminence and not rather of subiection as Iansenius expounds it So Baronius alledgeth that of Act. 10. 13. Arise Peter kill and eate to proue the Popes power to excommunicate the Venetians Kill that is excommunicate and eate that is bring them to the obedience of the Church of Rome This is goodly stuffe indeede sure they stand in neede of arguments to proue their cause that are driuen to these silly shifts So our Country-man Fisher to proue iustification by workes alledgeth that Text of S. Peter 1. Pet. 4. 8. Loue couereth the multitude of sinnes which he expounds thus that loue expiateth and purgeth away the guilt of our sinnes in the sight of God contrary to the direct sense of the holy Ghost Pro. 10. 12. 27. It is a wonder to see how both Bellarmine and all the Patrones of Purgatory wring and wrest the Scripture to vnderprop the Popes Kitchin The Scripture cannot name fire and purging but presently there is Purgatory as Esay 4. 4. and 9. 18. Mal. 3. 3. nor a lake where there is no water but there is Purgatory as Zachar. 9. 11. nor things vnder the earth Phil. 2. 10. Apoc. 5. 3. but there is Purgatory and yet they themselues confesse that they know not whether it be vnder the earth or no because the Church hath not yet defined where it is And Bellarmine bringeth in eight diuers opinions touching the place of Purgatory but two of their expositions touching Purgatory I cannot ouerpasse left I should depriue the Reader of matter of laughter in the midst of this serious discourse and them of commendation of wit for they are witty aboue measure the one is Mar. 13. 34. where it is said in a Parable that a certaine man going into a strange Country leaueth his house and giueth authority to his seruants and commandeth the Porter to watch This man going into a strange Country signifieth the soule say they which by death departeth out of this world his leauing authority with his seruants signifieth that he commandeth his executors to procure with his goods the prayers suffrages of the Church whereby he may be freed from Purgatory hee commandeth the Porter to watch that is he giueth part of his goods to his Pastor that he may diligently
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
be tormented restlessely in those burning flames which in their iudgement are equall for extremitie and anguish excepting onely continuance to the paines of Hell to be at rest and to sleepe in peace is Purgatorie become a Paradise and the skirts of Hell the suburbes of Heauen this is new strange Doctrine and yet this must needes bee if both their practice of praying for the dead in their Masse and their doctrine of the same in their bookes bee true 56. Concerning inuocation of Saints it is intangled with diuers absurd contrarieties for first if it bee true which the former Doctrine requires that wee must pray for the Saints which are in blisse that their glorie may bee increased then it is false that wee must pray vnto them For if they stand in need of our Praiers as they doe if by them their glorie is increased then they should pray vnto vs aswell as wee vnto them and if they stand in need of our helpe being in Heauen how can they helpe vs being on Earth if we be Mediatours for them how are they Mediatours for vs True it is that here below one man prayeth for another because they stand in need of one another but by another Doctrine which is also the truth the Saints enioy the sight and presence of God and therefore are most blessed for in him they enioy all sinnesse of ioy and glorie so that nothing can bee added to that happinesse which in their soules they enioy and therefore one of these two necessarily are false either we must not pray vnto them or we need not pray for them 57. Againe they a leage testimonies out of the olde Testament to prooue the inuocation of Saints as that Praier of Moses Remember O Lord Abraham Isaac and Iacob thy seruants and Ier. 25. If Moses and Samuel stand before mee my soule should not bee to this people and Gen. 48. 16. and Iob the 51. 2. Machabees 15. with diuers others and yet they teach that before Christ there was no Saint in Heauen but all in Lymbo Now if they were in Lymbo and could not help themselues vntil the Mediatour came how could they help others and if they did not enioy the presence of God themselues how could they be certified thereby as by a glasse of the necessities and Praiers of the liuing so that it must needes follow that either the Saints were not praied vnto or else if they were then they were in Heauen and not in Lymbo Especially seeing Bellarmine confesseth that the Saints in Lymbo did not ordinarily know the necessities of the liuing that being a prerogatiue of perfect blessednesse neyther tooke care of humane affaires nor were protectors of the Church as the Saints in Heauen are Bellarmine indeede seeing this absurditie acknowledgeth that for the reasons afore alleaged it was not a custome in the olde Testament to direct their Praiers purposely to the Saints but in their praiers to God to alleage the merits of the Saints but herein hee both crosseth himselfe and all his fellowes for if it be so why doth he and they produce testimonies out of the olde Testament to prooue their inuocation which is made directly vnto the Saints 58. Lastly they affirme that no Saints may bee worshipped publikely that is in the name of the Church vnlesse hee be canonized by the Pope for the auoiding of misprision and yet they confesse that none were canonized till 800. yeeres after Christ by Pope Leo the third and also that it is lawfull priuately to worship any of whose sanctity I haue an opinion now I would gladly know if this bee a way to auoide mistaking why was it forborne so long or why is it not vrged priuately aswell as publikely if canonization were necessary 800. yeeres after Christ to auoide mistaking then there was much mistaking before or else this remedy would not haue beene hatched and if it was necessary in the publicke seruice then is it much more in priuate deuotions seeing priuate men are more propense to false suppositions then a whole congregation is and so this new doctrine of canonization not onely condemneth the Idolatry offormer times in the inuocation of Saints but also openeth a wide doore to priuate superstition in that kind and so indeed crosseth and vndermineth it selfe for Bellarmine confesseth out of Sulpitius that the people did long celebrate one for a martyr who after appeared and tolde them that hee was damned and Alexander the third reprehendeth certaine men for giuing the honour of a martyr to one that dyed drunke and no doubt but many such Saints are in their Martyrologe at this day notwithstanding their canonization so that by canonizing they preuent mistaking by giuing liberty to priuate inuocation they giue occasion if not cause of mistaking then which what can be more contradictory 59. Againe when they barre all children that are vnbaptized out of Heauen and confine them to Limbo there to endure the punishment of losse for euer doe they not contradict another doctrine of theirs which teacheth that men dying without the baptisme of water if they haue baptismum flaminis vel sanguinis that is either suffer martyrdome for Christs sake or bee regenerated by his Spirit and so haue a desire to bee initiated by that Sacrament but are preuented by some meanes may notwithstanding goe to Heauen for if want of baptisme bee a sufficient cause to keepe from Heauen then it is so as well in men growne as in infants and if it bee not a sufficient cause to shut vp Heauen gates against men of yeeres then how can it be to yong infants especially seeing infants by their doctrine are equall to men in two things first that they may bee martyrs as well as they as the children whom Herod slew in Bethlâ—em are celebrated in their leiturgies and secondly that they may bee sanctified as well as they as Iohn Baptist was in his mothers wombe and in these two are precedent vnto them first that they are void of actuall transgressions with which men of yeeres are infinitely stayned and so neerer to Heauen then those and secondly though they haue no desire of baptisme in themselues yet they are deuoted thereunto both by the desire of their parents and by the purpose and intent of the Church And therefore all considerations being equall in the persons and the oddes remaining if there be any on the infants side it can bee no lesse then a direct contradiction that children vnbaptized cannot bee saued and men vnbaptized may bee saued for it implieth thus much in effect that the outward baptisme of water is necessary to saluation and yet the outward baptisme of water is not necessary to saluation 60. Againe concupiscence in the regenerate is denyed by them all to bee in it owne nature sinne and yet they all confesse that it is malum an euill and vitium a vice Is any thing naturally euill which is
6. Lastly concerning Monkes Fryers and Hermites they are names neuer heard of in the Apostles time nor in the purer age of the Church The first Hermite was one Anthony who liued three hundred yeeres after Christ who taught others that state of life and learned it of none as confesseth Bellarmine Monkes had no being in the best times of the Church sayth Agrippa though Bellarmine is not ashamed to say that the Apostles were the first Monks in Christianity who notwithstanding liued not alone in cels but went about the world preaching the Gospell some of them had wiues also both which are contrarie to the Monkish profession but Fryers are yet of a far later impressiō The orders of Dominick Francis sprung vp vnder Innocent the third in the time of the Laterane Councill about the yeere 1220. For when Pope Innocent would not be perswaded to confirme to Dominick his order of preaching Fryers hee dreamed that the Church of Laterane was ready to fall and that Dominick came in and with his shoulders vnder-propped it Vpon which dreame he presently sent for Dominick and granted his petition and sure not vaine was that dreame for had not Fryers beene the vpholders and chiefe Pillars of the Popes Church it had fallen longere this The croutched Fryers otherwise called the crosse-bearers sprang vp about the same time for Pope Innocent raising an army against the Albingenses whom the Pope accounted for Heretikes caused the souldiers to be signed with a crosse on their brest whereupon they were called crosse-bearers or croutched Fryers All the other orders of Fryers which amount as some reckon them to an hundreth at least are most of them of later institution And most true is the assertion of Wiclif that Fryers were neuer knowne in the world before the yeare 1200. 7. The Iesuites tooke their beginning about threescore and fifteene yeeres since For in the yeare 1540. their order was first confirmed by Pope Paul the third to Ignatius Loyola the lame souldier the chiefe Father and Patriarch of that viperous brood at the request and intercession of Cardinall Contarenus so that they are not yet beyond the bounds of a mans age and neuerthelesse they are growne to such maturity of craft and deceit that all other orders are but nouices to them they are the onely fellowes of the world for subtill practices and daring enterprises and now the chiefest props of the Papall sea For Dominick was weary of bearing that burden and for the ease of himselfe suffered Loyola to put vnder his shoulder and so now all the burden lyeth vpon him let him hold vp stiffely therefore or els all will goe to wracke 8. But now to the purpose Where were all these orders in the Apostles times and in the Primitiue age of the Church Then men reioyced to be called by the Name of Christ now these fellowes glory to be called by the name of Dominick or Francis and as if Christians was too base a name for them they will be called Iesuites of Iesus they say the Sonne of God but more truely of Bar-Iesus the Sorcerer that withstood the preaching of Paul was a peruerter of the straight wayes of the Lord or of a French weapon called Gesu◠wherewith these same bloudy Traitours vse to murther kings and Princes if they withstand their purposes whereupon is that elegant Epigram A Gesis sunt indita nomina vobis Quae quia sacrilegi Reges torquetis in omnes Inde sacrum nomen sacrum sumpsistis omen 9. But to shut vp in one word all the villany of these monstrous late-borne orders of Fryers let Aretine an Italian Poet describe them Frate sayth he in Italian is a Fryer euery letter of which word doth represent the nature of that generation for Furfanto a thiefe Ribaldo a filthy Ribald Asino an asse Traditore a Traitour Eretico an Heretike All together make the true and perfect definition of a Fryer Or as Lincolniensis defineth him A dead carcase risen out of his graue wrapped in a winding sheet and carryed among men by the Deuill But my purpose is not to bring vpon the stage their filthy and abominable liues hee that will see that let him read Clemangis in his booke of the state of the Church which hee wrote about two hundreth yeeres since And Cornelius Agrippa of the vanity of Sciences And Polidore Virgill and Aluarus Pelagius and Palingenius with Ariosto an Italian Poet c. and he shall finde matter not onely of wonder and admiration but also of griefe and lamentation that the Church of God should bee so long pestered with such filthy dregges but it is sufficient for this place to haue showne that neither their name nor orders were once heard of in the Primitiue Church 10. Thus much touching their persons Now for the iurisdiction exercised by these persons how not onely transcendent but repugnant it hath beene and is at this day to that of the Apostles and Primitiue Church their both Lordly titles and tyrannous practice doth clearely demonstrate For their titles which of the Apostles either assumed to himselfe which they might haue iustly done if it had beene their due or receiued from others these titles Vniuersall Bishop Head of the Church High Priest of the world Prince of Priests and Christs Vicar vpon earth c But the Pope of Rome doth challenge to himselfe all these yea more then these that he is as it were a god vpon earth hauing fulnesse of power and yet more aequè ac Christus Deus A God aswell as Christ a beeing of the second intention compounded of God and man and yet more Deus vindictae a God of reuenge and another god vpon earth and lastly Stupor mundi the wonderment of the world neither God nor man but a neuter betwixt both Could such intolerable pride euer enter into the heart of a man or could the tongue of any wight liuing dare to belch out such horrible blasphemies Surely none but hee that is that man of sinne who sitteth in the Temple of God as God and to whom is giuen a mouth to blaspheme the God of Heauen and in whose fore-head is written this name of blasphemy Deus sum errare non possum I am God I cannot erre But to the point Did euer Peter whose successour the Pope claimeth to bee challenge to himselfe any such titles or did euer any of the other Apostles or any Bishop in the Primitiue Church for the space of three hundreth yeeres Peter was so farre from this pride that hee giueth charge to all Elders of the Church that they should not behaue themselues as Lords ouer Gods heritage And in that very place hee equalleth himselfe to the rest and the rest to himselfe calling himselfe a fellow Elder and in another place hee calleth all the Disciples his brethren yea all the Israelites his brethren and all Christians his brethren behold his humility But the Pope acknowledgeth no
great antiquity And indeed why should it not bee obserued if the Pope cannot erre or if it be not fit to bee obserued how is it true that the Pope erreth not in defining matters of Religion The fourth was ordained by Paulus the second anno 1466. as they themselues will not deny 25. Besides these of the Virgin Mary they haue many other festiuall dayes of the same nature and stampe as the feast of Corpus Christi of the inuention of the Crosse of the dedication of Churches of All soules and a number such like all which are confessed nouelties for in the Apostles times and Primitiue Church during the space of foure hundred yeeres none of these were once heard of The feast of the Crosse was Gregory the fourths inuention anno 828. and Corpus Christi day was first ordained by Pope Vrbane the fourth about the yeere 1264. as confesseth Bellarmine himselfe who of his Apostolicall power gaue spirituall wages and special pardon to all that should personally obserue the houres of this holy solâ—mnity as at Mattens an hundred dayes pardon at Masse asmuch and so at first and second Euen-song at the houres of prime of tierce of sixth of noone of complete fourty dayes apiece and thus in like manner for the whole weeke following 26. The annuall seaâ—ts of dedication of Churches grew from a sinister imitation of Constantine the great who because hee kept a solemne day at the dedication of a certain Church which hee had built therefore it was receiued as a Law for Princes actions are the peoples directions to solemnize euery yeere a holy day vpon the day of the dedication of their Church And all Soules was the deuice of one Saint Odyll who as they write in Cicilia in the I le of Vulcane heard the voyces howlings of Deuils which complained with great griefe that the soules of them that were dead were taken away out of their hands by almes and prayers whereupon this feast was ordained wherein prayer should be made for al Soules And as for this so for the other they deuised strange miracles to win credit vnto them which plainely argueth their nouelty in that they stood in need of miracles to confirme them as for example touching the inuention of the holy Crosse they fable that it was first found in Paradise by Seth the son of Adam to whom Michael the Angell gaue a branch of the forbidden tree which hee planted vpon the graue of his Father Adam which tree beeing after found by Salomon in mount Libanus was translated vnto his house and there beeing worshipped by the Queene of Saba and foretold to bee the tree whereon the Sauiour of the world should bee hanged and by which Ierusalem should bee destroyed was therefore taken downe and buried deepe in the ground by Salomon in which place afterward the Iewes diging a pit for a poole to water their cattell found this tree from which such vertue arose to that poole that the Angels descended to mooue the water so that the first that bathed himselfe therein after the motion was healed of his disease whatsoeuer it was as wee read Iohn 5. Now vpon this tree was Christ crucified which being afterward buried againe in the earth was found out by Queene Helene the mother of Constantine through the discouery of one Iudas a Iew who was conuerted to the Christian faith by the sweet sauour that arose from the Crosse and the quaking of the earth and then that Crosse was discerned from the two other Crosses of the theeues by restoring life to a dead corps whereupon it was laide and the Deuill cryed in the aire that this Iudas had betrayed him as the other had done his Master Christ By these strange miracles they dignisy that holy feast and indeed shew it to bee nothing els but a meere fable and forsooth all this they fetch out of the Gospell of Nichodemus 27. So for the dedication of Churches they tell vs this miracle that when a Church of the Arrians was hal owed by Christian men and the reliks of Saint Fabian Saint Sebastian Saint Agathe brought into it the people being assembled heard suddenly the fearefull gronings gruntings of an hog running vp and downe inuisibly and seeking a passage out of the Church and for three nights together â—umbluâ—g in the roofe with an hideous noise which say they was nothing but the banishing of the Deuill out of that Church by the hallowing and dedicating of it Who would not then obserue deuoutly this feast seeing the benefit is so great that commeth by the thing it selfe whereof it is a memoriall But let vs leaue these tables to their golden or rather leaden Legend of lyes as their owne Canus termeth it and shut vp the point that both these heere named and a number such like festiuall dayes more precisely honoured and obserued in the Romish Church and with greater deuotion t 〈…〉 n Gods holy Sabbath it selfe are new inuentions as sprung vp from superstition so ordained to maintain the same and haue no ground either of true antiquity to countenance them or holy Scripture to vphold them but Iewish fables Apocrypha writings old wiues tales and forged miracles 28. Fourthly I requiâ—e satisfaction for their ceremonies vsed in both the Sacraments as first in the Eucharist their pompous circumgestation of it to bee seene viewed and adored which Cassander acknowledgeth to haue beene Praeter veterem morem mâ—ntem haud longo tempore inductaâ—â— Beside the custome and meaning of antiquity and brought in of late time And Bellarmine also to haue beene first ordained by Vrbanus the fourth their mixture of water with the wine and separation of leauen from the bread came both in from Pope Alexander the seuenth as witnesse both Polidore Virgill and Durantius Yea and Bonauenture doth confesse that this practice of mixing of water cannot bee read of in all the Scriptures nor found in the first institution of the Sacrament Their not breaking the bread out of a loafe but giuing it in small cakes Salmeron the Iesuite acknowledgeth to be contrary to the ancient practice of the Church Their dipping the consecrated hoste in the cup Suarez another Iesuite yeeldeth not to haue beene vsed by our Sauiour Christ and therefore must needs bee an Innouation Their putting the Sacrament not into the hands but into the mouths of the communicants the former Salmeron doth freely confesse to bee an action contrary to the first institution Lastly their various and ridiculous gestures murmuring dopping staring crossing c. with the strange garments vsed by the Priests in the time of their administration Six of Priests in signe of perfection because in sixe dayes God created Heauen and earth nine for Bishops in token that they are spirituall like the nine orders of Angels and fifteene for both in token of the fifteene degrees of Vertues No man can bee so simple but must needs see that they were neuer
this to rely vpon for his saluation then the other Thomas Aquinas seeing this ascribeth an infinitie to humane satisfactions in respect that they are informed by grace but therein hee crosseth both all his fellowes and their doctrine it selfe for if they be infinite then they must needes answere aswell for the eternall punishment as for the temporall which they denie 13. Thirdly they themselues cannot agree about their satisfactions as whether they bee by precept and commandements or only by counsell and perfection and not commanded whether the vertue of satisfying bee in the outward or inward act or in both whether they serue to take away the temporall punishment onely or the gilt of the sinnes or the punishment of hell excepting the eternitie whether they be so necessarie that there can bee no absolution without them or that a sinner may be absolued by his contrition and confession without penal satisfaction and lastly whether the least satisfaction be sufficient for the greatest temporall punishment or that a due proportion is to be obserued All these intricate questions are exagitated in this doctrine some holding one thing some another without any iust and sure resolution what a dangerous thing is it then to relye vpon these vncertainties which they themselues are not able to bring into grounded principles how much safer is it to repose our selues wholly vpon that blessed satisfaction of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ in which neyther Romanist nor Protestant could euer find any ambiguitie or doubt but that it is of absolute necessitie for mans saluation of infinite efficacie to appease the wrath of God and of proportionable dignitie to the iustice of God 14. Lastly after they haue with one hand stretched the worthinesse of their satisfactions to the highest straine yet they pull them downe againe with the other and make them of no force for let the satisfaction bee what it will yet the Popes pardon can dissolue the bonds thereof for it is a ruled case in their Religion that all satisfactorie punishment may bee released by a pardon and this pardon may bee obtained by saying not onely ouer certaine prayers visiting certaine Churches worshipping certaine relickes and kneeling to certaine pictures c. but also by disbursing certaine monie out of their purses that may come to the Popes purse and coffers Behold now the greatest danger of this doctrine thy satisfaction is released and made no satisfaction and it is released by him of whom thou maist iustly doubt whether hee hath authoritie so to doe and whether he may erre in doing it hee doth it de facto not examining whether thou bee truly penitent or no but whether thou hast payd thy penitentiall tax or no and that which is worst of all hee so granteth it that it is alwayes reuocable at his secret pleasure so that satisfaction is made no satisfaction by the Popes pardon the Popes pardon is made no pardon because it is bought with monie thy monie perish with thee that thinkest this gift of the holy Ghost can bee obtained with monie and the mony is cast away because the Pope may both erre in his pardoning and also reuoke his pardon when he list without giuing any notice of the cause vnto the partie what securitie can a Christian conscience find in these vnsure principles How much safer a course is it to rely vpon Christs satisfaction onely which is a true satisfaction indeed not disanulled by any act eyther of God or man not pardoned but performed not purchased by monie but by faith which is more precious then gold and lastly not reuocable by any power in heauen or in earth but standing firme as an euerlasting foundation for the saluation of the elect 15. Touching Antichrist whether side doth more incline to take part with his Apostacie and is in most danger to bee inthralled to his dominion let any indifferent man iudge for wheras it is granted by all both Romanists and Protestants yea and Fathers also that Antichrist should bee a Monarch clayming an vniuersall iurisdiction throughout the whole World and should also challenge to himselfe an infallibilitie of iudgement Protestants abhorring all such manner of subiection and renouncing all such power in any creature cannot possibly fall into the Antichristian gulfe But Papists professing the Pope to be the sole Monarch of the Church and his iudgement to bee of infallible truth in the defining of matters of faith must needs bee in more danger to bee in Antichrists Kingdome we cannot be slaues to Antichrist because we admit no gouernment like vnto his in the Church nor any such peremptorie power of not erring in the gouernment But they professing a gouernment and a power in that gouernment so agreeable to the state of Antichrist may suspect themselues to bee fallen into that Apostacie as they are indeed ouer head and eares Our religion then is more secure in this respect whereas theirs by their owne principles hath some affinitie and correspondence therewith and Antichrist himselfe may be in their Church but cannot by any probable coniecture be in ours 16 Againe for the Article of Inuocation of Saints the Romanists that hold the affirmatiue are in many respects subiect to many more and greater dangers then the Protestants which hold the negatiue for first if their doctrine bee not true they manifestly detract from the glorie of the Creatour and giue the same vnto his creatures Whereas if our doctrine bee false wee onely detract from the glorie of the creatures and giue it vnto the Creatour Now by how much it is a greater sinne to doe iniurie to the Creatour then to the creature by so much the more dangerous is their doctrine then ours and as it is safer to ascribe that glory to God which is due to man then to man that that is due to God so is there more safetie in our doctrine then in theirs 17. Secondly in respect of charitie if they erre in this opinion then doe they turne the holy Saints of God into abominable Idols and so offer that wrong vnto them which they being iealous of Gods glorie of all things most detest as the examples of Paul and Barnabas and of Peter and the Angell declare but if wee erre wee onely being iealous that Gods glorie may not be communicated to any other depriue them of a little worship which wee thinke belongeth vnto God and in the meane while esteeme them as blessed Saints and honour them by praysing God for them imitating their godly examples and keeping an honourable remembrance of them in our Churches Now in charity whether is a greater wrong to the Saints to turne them into Idols that is into deuils or for zeale of Gods glorie to take from them a little of their due honour 18. Thirdly in respect of conscience if they doe sinne in this it is the horrible and fearefull sinne of Idolatrie which being spirituall adulterie causeth a diuorce
Popish superstition doe say that it is an ordinarie matter A wonderful superstitiō that is nourished by Images so apparent that it cannot be denied Now if this were a scandall taken and not giuen they might in some sort bee excused but it is eūidently not onely occasioned but caused by reason that both the doctrine is inuolued with so many intricate questions and distinctions that it is impossible for an ignorant person to discerne thereof and also because the Image it selfe as the Prophet Habacuck telleth vs is a teacher of lyes For which cause as Polidore Virgil reporteth the Fathers of all vices condemned the worship of Images for feare of Idolatrie the most execrable vice of all The second offence is to the vnconuerted Iewes who are most zealous in this point of the Law against Images insomuch as Iosephus reports of them they did hate the verie Images of men in their Heathenish Trophees as being forbidden them by God Now it is well concluded by a iudicious obseruer of the Westerne Religions and without doubt is a most true obseruation that there is no one thing in outward respects that doth ingender in the Iewes such a detestation of Christian Religion and keepe them from being conuerted as the worship of Images in the Church of Rome for they and that by good reason may thus dispute If this Religion of Christians were of God then they would not oppose themselues to the expresse Commaundement of God in worshipping Images which he hath so plainly forbidden but they oppose themselues to Gods Commandement and worship Images therefore their Religion cannot bee of God Hence it is as the former learned Relator doth report that at Rome though all the Iewes in the Citie are constrained once a yeere to come to a Christian Church and there heare a Sermon for their pretended conuersion yet when as a Fryer before the beginning of his Sermon holdeth vp a Crucifix and prayeth vnto it in their open sight they are more alienated from the Christian faith by this odious spectacle then all the reasons and arguments that he can vse are able to perswade them to the same Behold two dangerous and fearefull scandals which arise from this doctrine one to their owne weake ones of which our Sauiour saith that it were better for a man that a milstone were hanged about his necke and that hee were throwne into the Sea then that hee should offend one of them the other to the obstinate Iewes whose conuersion shall be so beneficiall to the whole world as that Saint Paul calleth it life from the dead Now our Religion is farre from giuing any such offence to one or other either in this or any other point thereof if it bee not vtterly misconstrued and misconceiued 24. Againe in their worship of Relickes there is no securitie at all both in feare of Idolatrie which may bee well committed to them if they bee true in giuing them a higher measure of adoration then they themselues allow of which is easio to bee done by the ignorant multitude and also in feare of worshipping false relickes in stead of true whereof there is no small number in the Church of Rome as hath bin alreadie declared and lasty in feare of neglecting the true members of Christ by a too sumptuous prodigalitie towards the bones of I cannot tel what dead men or other creatures as is most vsuall in their Church and that in great excesse in which respects it is without question a more safe course that all such Relickes were buried vnder the earth with due honour of Christian sepulture then that they should thus indanger both godly pietie Christian charitie And this is the conclusion of their Cassander who sayth that it is more safe rather honourably to burie those corruptible relickes and to draw the World to the worship of their spirituall relickes which neither time can corrupt nor fraud counterfeit 25. Againe they hold and teach that traditions are to bee honoured with equall affection and deuotion as is due vnto the olde and new Testament and that there are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christianitie which are neyther expressely nor obscurely contained in the Scriptures And therefore by their owne confession they build many doctrines of their Religion vpon tradition onely without Scripture and acknowledge that without tradition many of them would reele and totter The Protestants hold the contrarie and constantly affirme that the Scripture is an all-sufficient directorie and a most absolute and perfect rule for faith and manners and therefore that wee ought not to relye our faith vpon any thing but Scripture alone Now let vs consider and examine whether of these two doctrines are more safe for a man to repose his soule vpon And that our doctrine is so may appeare first by the nature of the question it selfe which is controuerted betwixt them and vs for the question is not whether the Scripture bee the Word of God or no therein wee shake hands as an vndoubted truth but whether traditions bee the Word of God or no the affirmatiue they hold wee the negatiue and that by great and strong grounds which our aduersaries themselues cannot deny but that they carrie great shew of reason and probabilitie Now whether is the safer course to relye our faith vpon those principles that are vnquestionably Gods Word or vpon those that are controuerted disputed and called in question Any man that goeth about to buy a purchase will sooner venture vpon such a title which was neuer called in question nor can indeed bee doubted of then vpon a broken disputable and vndecided title he will looke twice vpon his pennie before he part with it in such a case lest caueat emptor proue him to bee of little discretion and teach him to repent when it is too late This is the case of euerie Christian wee are to buy the truth and not to sell it as Salomon counselleth Now who will not that hath any graine of wisedome in his heart rather lay out his monie that is his soule and conscience which as Augustine calleth it is numisma Dei Godscoyne because his Image is imprinted therein for the purchase of that truth which is without all exception in the holy Scriptures then for that which is said to be in traditions but mixed with many doubts and ambiguities It is a rule in Law that abundans cautela non nocet a man cannot be too warie in making sure his title to any thing whatsoeuer How much more then should it preuaile in cases of conscience where the damage is not of house and land but of our soules which to euery man ought to be more precious then the whole world Here is an euident direction for our choice if we eyther loue the truth or our own soules which must liue by it 26. Secondly it may appeare by the perpetuall certaintie of the holy Scripture and variable