think that these men entend the edification of Gods Church who â—rre in the maine principles and foundations of fayth and cannot stand vnlesse the Pope who hath manifestly declared himselfe an enemy of religion may sit iudge in his owne cause Chap. 3. Kellisons Motiues to Popish religion compared with the Motiues that may enduce men to embrace true Christian religion Therein also the true motiues to Popery are touched KEllison in his first Booke and fift Chapter talketh of Motiues to Christian religion but so coldely and barely as if his cause wanted life and motion First he telleth vs pag. 106. that our Sauiour Christ proued his Mission by prophecyes and miracles Among other miracles hee talketh of the strange coÌ„quest which the Apostles made of Idolatry Secondly he sayth we want reason and authoritye to perswade men to our religion being not comparable eyther to auncient Fathers or to Bellarmine Suarez and such fellowes in wit or learning or good life or antiquity or number or dignity Thirdly he talketh of consent succession But First the example of our Sauiour Christ the conquest made by Christs Apostles ouer Idolatrye maketh against the idolatrous papists For neither can the Pope prooue his vniuersall Monarchy by Prophets or by miracles nor hath any Christian man reason to adhere to papistes that want confirmation of their Popes and Masse-priestes Mission and yet bring into their Churches heathenish idolatry and much false and erronious doctrine and namely concerning the 7. Sacramentes the sacrifice of Christs body and blood in the Masse for quicke dead Popish purgatory and teaching that man by power of free will is able to worke his owne saluation that we are to make vowes and confessions to Saints to offer sacrifice in honor of them that we are to satisfie for sinnes whose guilt is remitted in Purgatory that the Pope hath power to deliuer soules out of Purgatory by his Indulgences that his Chaire is the foundatioÌ„ of the church and such like doctrines of deuils Secondly the ancient Fathers are wholy against the papistes in these poynts As for the Popes of Rome and their parasites Bellarmine Suarez and the rest they are not such as are to be bragged vpon eyther for learning wit good life or any vertue Thirdly neither are the papistes comparable in number to the Turkes Paâ—aÌ„s nor haue they eyther true succession or consent or antiquity that maketh for them Nay if the papistes would stand to these motiues they were cleerly gone For neither haue they prophesies or miracles for them Nor can the Pope or the Masse-priests prooue their mission by miracles nor doth antiquity make for them As for good life this K. may be much ashamed to speake of it the filthynes of Popes Cardinals Masse-priestes Monkes Nonnes and Friars being so notorious to the worlde and recorded in so many storyes and actes of Councels What then is the reason that so many adhere to papistes and what are the motiues that enduce so many to like their religion Forsooth first Fire and Sword For they kill all that will not receiue the Popes marke or that once mutter against their idolatrous religion Secondly secret and trecherous practises against all that shall once dare to professe the truth Masse-priestes brewe treason and rebellion Iesuites set on assassinors The Pope hath his Agents with all Princes Neither doth he or his Agents omit any occasion to stirre vp Princes to make warre against them that professe the truth and to persecute them to death Thirdly excoÌ„municating and killing and poysoning of Kings opposite to the Popes tyranny By the Popes practice K. Henry the 8. and Quéene Elizabeth were often in danger here in England By the trechery of the Leaguers King Henry the 3. was slayne and Henry the 4. wounded and brought to great extremity in France Henry of Lucemburgh was poysoned by a Dominican Fryar Frederic the 2. was empoysoned and in the end murdered as Matthew Paris doth signifie and this no dout by the Popes practise The 5. of Nouember anno 1605. a trayne of gunpowder was layd by certaine Papistes vnder the vpper house of Parliament purposing to destroy the King the Quéene the Prince the nobles and commons there assembled and by their destruction to replant popery in England The treason discouered they broke forth into open rebellion Fourthly slaundrous Libels as the inuectiues of Alan and Parsons against Quéene Elizabeth and the State of Saunders against Her and her Parents and Counsaile of the Leaguers and Iesuites against King Henry the 3. and 4. of France and the rayling discourses written against Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza Knox and all godly men declare Fiftly their impudent lies and fables in setting foorth their owne Religion and discommending the truth and such as eyther now or in time past professed it as the fabulous tales of Iacobus de voragine Surius Baronius and diuers writers of popish Histories will testifie Sixtly their publishing of counterfet bookes vnder the names of Fathers and the corrupting of Fathers by their expurgatorie indexes 7. Their impudent falsification of ancient Fathers and other writers as may bee prooued out of the allegations of Bellarmine Stapleton and other popish Proctors 8. Their false imputations laide vpon others and their impudent denials of thinges done by themselues 9. The diligent suppressing of the Books of holy Scripture and all Bookes written in vulgar tongues concerning matters of religion 10. The prohibiting of Christians to dispute reason or question of matters of faith 11. The ignorance blindnes of christians that know nothing but onely such matters as the false Fryars and Masse-priestes tel them 12 The impudent clamors raylings of this generation in Pulpits lying and slaundring all that professe the Gospell sincerely 13. The rigor of auriculer confession by meanes whereof the Popish faction vnderstandeth all mens secrets 14. The bloody crueltie of the popes agentes executioners and inquisitors Finally the rewardes and prayses that are giuen to those that trauaile eyther by writing or practise to maintaine the Popes cause Without these motiues all the motiues mentioned by Kellison were to no purpose As for vs wee haue two principall motiues to hold vs in the truth which would also mooue others to draw vnto vs if they knew them The first is the truth and iustice of our cause The next is the impieties blasphemies abhominations fooleries absurdities iniustice of Popery For the truth of our Religion weâ— offer to bring Scriptures councels Fathers antiquitie consent true succession law reason and all other proofes required in the iustification of Religion The reasons to deterre men from Popery we shal God willing deduce at large in a particular discourse Thus much may serue to requite Kellisons discourse of motiues to Religion for the present Chap. 4. Of the markes and properties of Heretickes THe name and nature of Heresie beeing so odious it is not to be maruelled if the Patrons thereof disguise themselues in their tearmes names
promised as much as he Yet sought he the destruction of the King State being perswaded thereto by Iesuites and led into treason by the rules of Popish Religion As for the Masse and Doctrines of Poperie which he bringeth with him they leade to destruction and not to saluation they teach idolatrye and not Gods true worship error and Heresie and not true Faith The Popes obedience is a yoke in supportable His lawes are snares of mens consciences His Priests and Fryars are the Locustes come out of the bothomlesse pit of Hell His Religion is neyther Catholike nor auncient but rather a mixture of new and olde Heresies Neither can the King looke eyther for safety or peace so long as he suffereth a generation of viperous Priests and Friars depending on an Arch-Priest to liue within the bowels of the State and a packe of Papists to vphold the authority of his opposites vnder colour of Religion Take away the Gun powder Papists such as had rather serue Antichrist then Christ to bow their knees to Baalim then to worship God and then you remoue the hopes of our enemies that seek to disturbe our peace the firebrāds of troubles that are the likeliest meanes to set all on a flame To such as demaund why hee dedicated this great bale of blotting paper to the King he giueth this answere that hee cannot want an answere because he cannot want a reason And no doubt but he imagined that therein he did pindarize and speake very eloquently Yet many want answeres that haue farre more reason and honestie then he diuers want no ready answeres that proceede without reason Whatsoeuer hee pretendeth little reason had he to offer this bundl e of papers to the King For albeit learned men present their Bookes to Kings supposing nothing to bee well begunne vnlesse after God the King fauour it as Vegetius affirmeth yet this is nothing to this rude peece of worke that is so fraught with calumniations and idle discourses that neither God nor man can well seeme to fauour it Further although the King delite in Bookes and hath set foorth diuers rare monuments of his rare wit and learning yet doth hee not take pleasure in such scurrilous surueyes Nor may we thinke that a man of such iudgement and learning can like or allowe such base stuffe Thirdly we confesse that the King is indeede the protector of Religion the Champion of the Church and defender of the Faith But little doth this auaile Kellisons cause who pleadeth rather for jdolatrie and superstition then Religion for the sinagogue of Antychrist rather then for Christs Church for the errors and abuses of Poperie rather then for the faith of Christ Fourthly it is not to be doubted but that all the Kings true friendes did tryumph and make Bonfires at the Kings happie entrance into the Kingdome and at his Coronation But that sheweth that the Iesuites Masse-priestes and their adherents are not the Kings true Friends For they tryumph but a little at the Kings prosperitie and many of them of late haue sought insteede of Bonfires which this K. calleth Feux de Ioy to set the Cittie vppon a fire to blow vp the Parliament house and places adioyning with Gunne-powder Other their consorts are more desirous to burne the bones bodies of Gods saints then to make bonfires when they vnderstand of the Kinges prosperous successe Fiftly wee acknowledge that God by his prouidence hath reserued the King for the Crowne of England quietly possessed him of his Crowne But we know also that the Papists haue of late sought to depriue him of his liberty life and Crowne And Parsons and the Iesuites of long time haue oppugned the Kings Title both of them resisting not onely the Kings right but also Gods prouidence Finally if for all these fauours God expect at his Maiesties handes that hee imploye himselfe in some honorable seruice for the Catholike Church and Christes true faith and for the deliuerance of his Realmes from Aegiptiā captiuitie and the restoring of his subjects to the Catholike faith as Kellison desireth then is hee to take a resolute course for the remouing of al idolatrous Masse-priestes which seduce his Subiectes and turne them from the Catholike faith their alleageance to imbrace humane traditions and the decretaline Doctrine of the Pope and to prefer the Pope before their King Then is he further to ouerthrow the groues of the jdolatrous Priestes and to prouide that his Realmes be not againe entangled with a yoake of bondage ouer-whelmed with ignorance Aegiptian darkenesse Lastly he is to see that Heresies and false Doctrines bee not receiued vnder the colour of Romish Religion Most grossely therefore hath this Romish Legat fayled in the proofes of his presumptuous attempt in presenting his worthlesse and trifling discourses to the King But hauing once passed the limits of modestie he passeth himself in impudency afterward aduenturing to preferre a sute to the King for libertie to Papists and for tolleration of Popish Religion A matter that with modestie cannot be mencioned to so pious a King and by rules of Religion and state may not be granted For it is impious Idolatrous and heretical And therfore may not be admitted of christiās It is factious rebellious derogatory both to the prerogatiue of Princes liberty of Subiects And therfore not to be endured in any wel gouerned state Finally themselues admit no Religion contrarie to their owne false groundes if they can doe withall Why doe they then require that of others that they yeeld not to others thēselues if he deny any point of these he shall finde them iustified in diuers answers framed to the importune supplycations of Papistes and wee shall alwaies be readye to prooue the same againe as oft as the matter shall come in question But had he reason to come to the King yet he hath no reason to rayle on the Kings predecessor Queene Elizabeth of famous memorie as hee dooth charging hir first with raysing a storme of persecution and next with the ruine of the Catholtke faith Nay most falsely he chargeth a most clement and mercifull Queene with persecution and a Christian Prince of singular pyetie with hatred of Catholike Religion Moste falsely I say for al her actes and lawes doe argue an excellent moderation in her proceedings against such as moste violentlye prosecuted her and so farre was she vrged to doe that shee did that the secular Priestes not onely excuse her for proceeding against Papists but also to their vttermost defend her Furthermore no christian Prince in our time shewed more zeale in the defence of true Catholike Religion then she True it is that shee fauoured not Popish errors But nothing is more different then Popery and Catholike Religion Neither shall this K. euer prooue the contrarie Hauing ended his idle discourse concerning the dedication of his book he maketh bolde to begin his sute for a tolleration of Popery But his proceding is
or the obliquity of the action but that he directeth their wicked actions to good endes which is the Doctrine of Saint Augustine in enchiridio ad Laurentium and diuers other places Melancthon also is moste wickedly slaundered by this false and wicked fellow for he hath no such wordes as those wherewith hee standeth charged Neither may we doubt but this fellowe that hath such leysure to prye into all mens faults wold haue set down Bezaes wordes and any thing writtē or taught by vs if the same had made for his purpose Wherefore seeing this K. setteth downe his owne malicious slaunders and not our words he may if he finde anye inconuenience or absurditie redounding thereof take the same wholy to himselfe and not impute it to vs. He may also forbeare to prooue that God is not the author of sinne For vnlesse himselfe haue any such wicked conceite we know no man that will maintaine any such blasphemy In his second Chapter of his fift Booke hee chargeth Caluin further with teaching that Gods will and power doth so domineere ouer the wil of a sinner that he cānot resist Gods motion which eggeth vrgeth him to sin Matters vtterly false forged For proofe hee citeth Lib. 3. instit c. 21. 6. et 8. But there is no such matter to be found in those places There also he is charged to say that Gods will is a necessity of things But neither doth he say any such thing in that place nor if hee should say that Gods absolute wil doth impose a necessitie of thinges doth it followe that God doth egge and vrge men to sinne It appeareth therfore that this lying companion sought not to finde out truth but to oppresse truth and the fauorers therof with lyes and slaunders deuised by himselfe Thirdly he supposeth that we teach that Gods commaundements are impossible and that a man can as soone touch the heauens with his finger as fullfill the least commaundement But this is so grosse a lye as a man may almost touch it with his finger For although we beleeue that noe man in this frailty of our nature after the fall of Adam is able perfectly to fulfill the whole Law of God yet absolutely and simply no man teacheth them to be impossible Nay we know they were possible to Adam in the state of innocencie and that now by grace many commaundemets may be performed But suppose we should say that the Law cannot perfectly bee performed yet should wee say no more then Ambrose and Hierome do teach in Galat. 3. and Chrysostome in Gal. 2. and Bernard serm 50. in cant and Thomas Aquinas in Gal. 3. lect 4. He wold prooue that the cōmaundements of God are easie and light But therin he sheweth his owne lightnesse that condemneth himselfe for not performing that which he taketh to be light The rest of his illations are meere fooleryes grounded vpon his owne fancyes In his fourth Chapter he would inferre that wee make God a most cruell Tyrant because we teach that no man is able to performe the whole Law of God perfectly But his inference is most wicked and blasphemous and could not proceede but out of the blasphemous thoughts of a wicked Masse-priest Out of our Doctrine no such matter is to bee inferred For as in matter of debts the Creditor may iustly exact his owne the Debtor hauing bound himselfe to pay and after proouing vnsufficient vnable so man is iustly punnished for not paying his debt whereto he is boūd which by his owne fault he is made vnable to pay Luther de seruo arb confesseth that in this obscure light of nature and debility of vnderstanding man cannot see why God should not bee vniust condemning him that cannot chuse but sinne But yet he accuseth not God eyther of injustice or cruelty as this man would haue it but rather accuseth man of blindenesse and ignorance And yet others do plainly see that God doth most iustly exact that at the hande of man which by his owne default hee is become vnable to performe Finally he chargeth the reformers that they pul down the true God out of his throne and place an Idole in the same of their owne imagination And his reason is first for that all Heretiks are Idolaters and next for that we hold that God is the author of sinne and of a bad nature vnreasonable and cruell But if all Heretikes be Idolaters then as the Papistes are grosse Heretiks so are they grosse Idolaters holding diuers brāches of the Simonian Carpocratian Collyridiā Angelican Manichean Pelagian Heresie and of diuers other damned Heresies Againe if all Idolaters pull God out of his Throne then the Papistes that giue Gods honor to creatures worship the Sacrament stockes and stones Idolatrosly do pull God as much as in them lyeth out of his Throne Finally if we haue cleared our selues from all the iniust imputations of this Sycophant and shewed that neither Caluin nor any of our teachers do hold that God is author of sinne or guilty of any iniustice then I hope the very Papistes thē-selues wil be ashamed to heare such blasphemous termes proceed frō their teachers bee more wary hereafter how they giue eare to our aduersaryes clamours It is one thinge to crye loud and another thing to bring sound proofe Sycophants obiect great crimes but wise Iudges proceed according to proofes Chap. 9. That our Doctrine giueth due obedience and respect both to Princes and to their Lawes HOW wickedly the Popes of Rome haue abused the clemency of Christian Princes it would require a long discourse to relate This breefly may be verified that they haue trod downe the maiestie of Kinges contemned their Lawes and set variance betwixt the Prince and his subiectes from time to time And yet as if the Doctrine of Popery were cleare in this poynt this K. blusheth not to obiect the faultes of his consortes to vs. Like vnto Parmenian the Donatist who when hee might bee ashamed of his owne faultes yet blushed not to accuse innocent Catholiques Cum pro tuis erubescere debueras saith Optatus to Parmenian Lib. 2. contr Parmen catholicos innocentes accusas The difference betwixt our Doctrine and Popery in this point is very great We say it is not lawfull for any subiect to lay violent handes vpon their annoynted Kinges The Papistes are taught to rebell against Kinges excommunicat by the Pope Nay Pius the fift in bulla contr Elizahethā denounceth them excōmunicate that would not stirre against Queene Elizabeth and take armes against her Secondly we say that the King is not subiect to any forraine Potentate They hold that it is necessary to saluation for the King of England to be subiect to the Pope and thinke men bound to beleeue it Nay they say the Pope is as farre aboue the Emperour as the Sunne aboue the Moone Thirdly we say that the Kinges Lawes concerning Ecclesisticall matters are to be obeyed The Papistes giue all power in Ecclesiasticall affaires to
the Pope and say that the King therin is but an vsurper Fourthly we say that not only lay-men but also all Masse-priestes Monkes and Fryers ought to be subiect to the Prince These fellowes exempt their Clergie and their goods from Princes gouernement as appeareth by Bellarmines treatise de exemptione Clericorum and diuers decrees of Popes Finally we make Princes and Kinges soueraigne cōmaunders ouer their subiects and immediate exequutors of Gods lawes Contrariwise the papistes make them most base exequutioners of the Popes Lawes and therein preuaile so farre that they not only set Princes together by the eares one with another but make them the Popes hangmen and force them to persecute their owne innocent subiects if they wil not admit the Popes Idolatrous and Hereticall Religion But saith Kellison Lib. 6 c. 1. they teach that no Prince can binde a man in conscience to obey his Lawes and commaundements and giue subjectes good leaue to rebell and reuolte This he sayth and how prooueth he that which hee saith forsooth saith he Luther exhorted the Germaines not to take Armes against the Turke And in his Booke against the King of England called him all to naught Secondly he telleth vs of the Rebellion of the Boores in Germanie Thirdly he citeth certaine places out of Luther shewing that the Popes lawes or Princes positiue lawes binde not to mortall sin nor rule the conscience Lastly he spendeth much idle talke about the tumults in France Flaunders and Germany But first what maketh all this to lawes binding in conscience Secondly the Articles of his accusation containe manifest vntruthes For neither doe wee giue subiectes leaue to reuolt neither doe wee deny that Princes lawes doe binde in conscience as oft as they commaund any thing commaunded in Gods word or prohibite thinges by God prohibited If Luther respected not the Pope nor his decretale lawes it is no maruell seeing hee is no lawfull Prince but an Vsurper and the head and maintayner of Antichristes Kingdome Furthermore where hee and Caluin defend Christian mens libertye as touching their conscience they say no other thing then that which they haue learned and which euerie man may gather out of Saint Iames Chap. 4. where hee sayth there is owne Law-giuer that can saue and destroy As for Kellisons proofes they are eyther grounded vpon false reports or else containe matters impertinent First false it is that Luther exhorted the Germains not to take armes against the Turke Nay hee rather encouraged them to defend their countrie against the Turke onely shewing them that if they meant to preuaile against him they must first correct their liues and reforme their errors in Religion But whatsoeuer he said in this argument it concerneth this matter in question nothing Secondly hee was not King Henries subiect but dealt against him more freely as being by subtiltie of Papists set foorth to countenance the Popes leud cause Thirdly wee defend not the Rebelliō of the rustical Boores in Germany neyther did Luther spare to reprooue them and to write against them Beside that the cause of their insurrection was not Religion but temporall oppression Fourthly wee haue before declared what is Luthers Caluins meaning concerning the binding of mens consciences Fiftly the Germains and States of the low Countries are well able to cleare themselues from all blot of rebellion or imputation laid vpon them by this sycophant as may appeare to any that will reade their defences Finally the Christians in France neuer rebelled but onely tooke armes in defence of their liues against such as broke the Kings edictes and therefore haue beene iustifyed in their actions by the Kings themselues and by their edictes at diuers times Wherfore seeing their owne Kings did cleare them this swad hath no reason to accuse them In his second Chapter of his sixt booke he chargeth vs that our Doctrine dooth bring iudges and tribunall seates into contempt And his reason is partlye for that Luther and Caluin teach that the positiue lawes of Princes bind not in conscience and partlye for that they doe condemne the Popish Doctrine of freewill But his reason is so simple and soppish that it falleth of it selfe without our helpe For albeit the positiue lawes of Princes that haue no strength of Gods lawe doe not reach so farre as to binde the conscience yet all the lawes of Princes that haue their ground in Gods law doe binde the conscience also Likewise the authoritie of Princes is of God and therefore no man may resist thē without offence of conscience Furthermore albeit positiue lawes of Princes binde not in conscience yet they doe bind men to susteine the punishment inflicted by Princes lawes not direct contrarie to Gods lawes Finally albeit mā haue not freewil after the opinion of the Papists in discerning spirituall matters and dooing works pleasing to God tending to the ateining of eternal life yet he hath freewill to doe lewdly and therefore iustly deserueth to be punished This fellow therefore rather deserueth to bee punished that vnderstandeth our cause no better then admired for his profound sophistrie He addeth that it followeth by the Doctrine of these nouuellants that Princes haue no authoritie to commaund But then these olde hacsters must bring in new strange conclusions For as wee haue before declared wee maintaine the Princes authoritie against the vsurpation of the Pope and obey his lawes better then Papistes who for a long time haue stood for the Pope against their Princes both in France and other places Kellison like an old sycophant may therefore doe well seeing the Popes tyrannie is so newe to abstaine from charging others with noueltie and forbearing to rayle and lye to produce some better arguments In the third chapter of his sixt booke hee concludeth that wee bring Princes lawes into contempt and in the fourth and last Chapter that by our Doctrine neither the Prince is to rely vppon his Subjects nor Subiects vpon the Prince nor one vpon another And all this because Luther and Caluin teach that Princes meere positiue lawes doe not binde in conscience But as leapers that mistake their rising fall oft in the midst so disputers fayling in their groundes come short of their conclusion This position of Luther and Caluin I haue heeretofore shewed to haue beene quite mistaken by Kellison But had they taught so as he imagineth yet doe they neither bring lawes into contēpt nor breed any distrust or euil correspōdence betwixt Princes subiects For al Gods lawes binde in conscience mans lawes as farre as they haue vigor frō Gods law The authority of Princes is grounded vpon the Law of God From the same also not onely our duty towards our parents but also of husbands to their wiues wiues to their husbands of children to their parents contrarywise for the moste part receiueth strength Finally the same authoriseth diuers contracts willing vs so to doe to others as wee would haue others to doe to vs. Furthermore beside
accompt it a matter very heynous Fiftly next to Lucifer the Pope excelleth in pride He treadeth on Princes neckes he giueth his feete to bee kissed hee rideth on mens shoulders he is called a God on the earth and vsurpeth his honor Such also are the Prelates and the rest of the popish Clergie Auentinus lib. 6. annal in praef sheweth they excell in pride and with goods giuen to the poore keepe Dogges Horses Harlots Pauperum alimentis canes equos scorta alunt Sixtly neuer was idlenesse more in price then since Monkes and Fryars came into the world They deuoure the fruites of the painefull labour of others and intend nothing but to eate drinke sleepe and to inioy carnall pleasures Of such we may say with the Apostle 2. Thess 3. Hee that laboureth not let him not eate Seauenthly albeit the Masse-priestes Monkes Nonnes and Fryars forsweare marriage yet not sect of Religion or state of men or women is more impure Honorius Augustodunensis speaking of Nunnes saith they are more common then Harlots Omnibus fornicarijs peius prosternuntur In England most horrible abhominations were found in the visitation of Abbyes Petrus de Alliaco lib. de reformat Eccles and Theodoric à Niem in nemore vnion diuers others shew that albeit Priestes were not marryed yet commonly they kept Harlots and that now is euident in our times by common experience Sacerdotes moderni saith Holcot in lib. sap lect 182. sunt similes sacerdotibus Baal sunt angeli apostatici sunt similes sacerdotibus Dagon sunt sacerdotes priapi sunt angeli abyssi The Priestes of his time he resembleth to heathen Priestes and sheweth how much they were subiect to lechery and heathenish impieties Finally the Doctrine of Popery is a doctrine full of licenciousnesse the Popes of Rome take vpon them to dispense with all sins and wickednes Their indulgences as the Germans Grauam 3. complaine are causes of many mischiefes hinc stupra say they incestus adulteria periuria homicidia furta rapinae foenora ac tota malorum lerna They take vppon them to absolue moste wicked sinners à poena culpa Nay euerie Masse-priest challengeth to himselfe power to giue absolution to such as come to confession The Iesuites of late absolued them before hand which by gun-powder went about to blow vp the Parliament house HaÌ„mond the Iesuite absolued Pearcy Catesby and their fellowes taking armes against their King and Countrie While men hope to satisfie for their sinnes in purgatorie they deferre repentance to the last breath Their enemies they tye with yron bondes Alexander the 3. would not release the Emperor vntill he had trod on his necke with his feete and vsed him with greate indignities Contrarywise they promise heauen to their friends though laden with greeuous siâ—s They hold euerie transgression of the Popes decretales to bee sinne This is therefore a Religion that both promiseth reward to cutthroates greeuous sinners and by their indulgences absolutions and fancies of purgatory hold a sinner so fast bound in sinne that there can bee no hope for him to bee loosed as long as he followeth their wicked Doctrines As for Luther and Caluin they are farre from such wicked courses They teach christian liberty But they extend it not so that they exempt Christians eyther from the obedience of Gods lawes or mans lawes but onely from the cursse of the law and from humane traditions that they binde not mens consciences They distinguish Christ Moyses And so would Kellison too but that hee talketh hee knoweth not what Of Moyses his law they make diuers vses and onelye detract from it the effect of iustification and saluation by reason it accuseth man of sinne and is not fulfilled The Apostle also teacheth if iustice were of the law that Christ had dyed in vaine Of the author and original of sinne and of conscience they teach most Christianlye following therein the Doctrine of the Apostles and holy Fathers of the church The pride of the Pope his adherents they detested and refused both by wordes and examples and so farre were they from idlenesse and allowing of idlenesse that they thought him vnworthy to liue or eate that laboured not in some honest and lawfull vocation Concerning chastitie they taught as truely as the Papists wickedly They shewed that it consisted not in forswearing marriage but in abstinence from all filthie thoughtes actes and speeches That which some impute to Luther of taking the Mayde when the wife refuseth is a meere calumniation He sheweth onely what some doe or at the least threaten to doe and not what they ought to doe Of the degrees of consanguinitie they teach better then the Pope They neuer taught that a man might marrie his brothers wife or his Neece or his Sister as the Popes haue doone Finally they hold no sinners fast bound in sinnes but shew the right way how to rise from sinne by faith in Christ and true repentance clearing those doubts which before had entangled many Christian soules and brought them to vtter destruction If then this K. had not had his conscience seared his eyes seeled and his vnderstanding darkned in these points he would haue seene and acknowledged the deformities of his owne fellowes Doctrine and abstained from accusing others Chap. 11. A reiection of Kellisons slaunderous accusations imputing in his 8. Booke Atheisme and contempt of Religion to the professors of true and Christian Religion in the Church of England COnsorte not thy selfe with detractors saith Salomon Prouerb 24. For their destruction shall come vppon them suddenly But Kellison was not so wise as to borrowe light from so wise and prudent a King He hath chosen rather to imitate fooles who as if all their treasure were in their tongues count it gaine to speake lewdely of their betters Istic est thesaurus stultis in lingua situs saith plautus in paenulo vt quaestui habeant malè loqui melioribus Forgetting his friendes in Italy Spaine and other countries groaning vnder the captiuity of Antichrist in his preface he chargeth his natiue couÌ„try of England as vnfortunate for ingendring a certaine Monster called Atheistes But if our Countrie men had lesse frequented Italy there had béene farre lesse Atheisme then in England now there is It is well knowne that Machiauelisme came from Italy and rose not in England and how Englishmen Italienated are said to be like Diuels incarnated Furthermore if the Masse-priestes as they haue brought with them the dregges of Popish heresies had not also brought with them the sinnes of Sodome and mixed diuine Religion with temporall policies and state practises seeking with fire and Gun-powder to reestablish in this kingdome the Popes tyranny then had he had no colour of this imputation Neither dooth this any way concerne vs that professe Religion heere in England beeing the proper crime of the Italianated and Hispaniolized Masse-priestes and their consortes that beeing inspired with the malicious spirit of Antichrist liue like Atheistes