Reader to set down here the particular sayings of every one of them And if ye had formed your arguments out of them I should have formed my answer by the grace of God to every one of them And thus much concerning your ground and the proofs of it Now I come to that which ye gather of it SECTION IV. Whither the Church of Rome be the only true Church and the Reformed not true Churches OF this we collect that our Church must be the only true Church and not theirs because ours hath never been interrupted nor hath failed in any substantial point of faith and Religion since Christ and his Apostles dayes and theirs hath done To confirm this I say that M. John nor no Minister in Scotland can be able to assign to us the circumstances of all mutations and changes in Religion That is to say 1. The author who first began our Religion 2. The time when it was begun 3. The place where it began 4. The true Church who said against the same 5. The matter it self which was changed or begun 6. Nor the faithful number from whom they departed All these things we shal assign to their Religion and that since Christ and his Apostles 1. The first auâ—hor of their Religion albeit not in all things was Martin Luther an Augustine Frier 2. He began his Religion in the year of God 1517. 3. He began the same in Saxony in the countrey of Almanie 4. The Church of Rome Italie France Spain Scotland England Denmark Sweden Pole a great part of Almanie with the east and west Indies which were the true Church said against him 5. The heads of Religion which he first said against were Pardons He affirmed that man was only justified by Faith He denied the Supper of our Lord to be a sacrifice c. 6. He departed himself from all the Christian Churches in Europe in the Indies and other places and therefore he had no predecessors of his own Religion as we read in the Apologie of the English Protestants that he and Zuinglius were the first that came to the knowledge of the Evangel and therefore none immediatly before them Then seeing that there was none of his profession in the earth before him immediatly neither visible nor invisible he and his could not be the Church of Christ for it hath ever stood and never failed no not the space of one day universally because our Savior saith I shal be with you every day to the consummation of the world M. John Welsch his Reply As to your collection the form of it must be this That Church only must be the true Church that hath never been interrupted nor failed in any substantial head of faith and Religion since Christ and his Apostles But say ye yours is such and ours not Therefore your Church is the true Church and ours not The proposition I grant But all the controversie lyes in the probation of your assumption Yea in stead of proving ye say it is not possible to me nor to no Minister in Scotland to assign to you the circumstances of all mutations and changes in your Religion as the person time place c. And then ye attempt to assign all these circumstances of our Religion upon the which ye conclud the falsehood of it So we will first see how ye prove your own and then see how ye disprove ours Indeed this argument of yours is of such account with you that there are not many of your Writers but they have set it as it were in the vant-guard of their host and among the greatest of their strengths and bulwarks for to uphold their ruinous Babel So Hammilton and Hay in their demands to the Ministers of Scotland so Campion so Duraeus Scotus against Whitaker in his defence so your Rhemists upon the 28. of the Acts and on 1. John 2. and so Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eccles cap. 5. Whereby it may be seen of what account this argument of yours is in the judgement of your Church But to answer to your argument first I say If there be no mutations or changes in your Religion since Christ and his Apostles then your Religion and doctrine will be one with that which is set down in the Scripture of God For you will not deny I hope but the Scripture doth sufficiently testifie what doctrine and Religion was in Christs and his Apostles dayes And so let it once be put in the ballance of the Scripture and tryed thereby and then I hope it will soon be made manifest how far it is changed So and you dare M. Gilbert let once your Religion be set upon the pannel and let it once have an assise of the Scripture and then the plea will end I hope Next I say it will not follow We cannot assign all the circumstances of changes in your Religion Therefore your Religion is uncorrupted For it suffiseth if we can prove the first only that is the matter or doctrine it self which is changed and that by comparing it with the Scriptures of God suppose we could not assign all the rest of the circumstances of the mutation as the time place author c. for the changes of many things are most notorious and yet all the circumstances of the change thereof not known We say then it is not needful to seek the beginnings and circumstances of the decays and corruptions in your Church when the corruption and change it self is so manifest by comparing your doctrine with the written Word of God that it cannot be denyed For will you say that he who is deadly diseased is whole and sound because I cannot tell you the first article of time the place and first occasion of the disease When it is manifest that a city is full of misorder and confusion will ye say that ye will not believe it to be so unless you know the first beginnings and progress of these misorders If you saw a ruinous house would ye say Prove me and tell me all the circumstances of the change of it otherwise I will not believe it Will ye deny that a ship could be drowned unless it were told you all the circumstances of the change of the leck where through it drowned If any found a man fallen in a pit shal he not believe that he is fallen whom nevertheless he sees to be there unless it were told him when and by whom he was cast into the same Even so will ye not believe or will ye hinder all others to believe that your Church and Religion is ruinous consumed rotten dead drowned and full of misorder heresie and confusion unless the first beginnings of these changes can be told you We say therefore it is sufficient to prove the ruine and consumption of your Church and Religion if by comparing your doctrine with the truth of God in the Scripture we make evident the direct opposition betwixt them suppose we could not assign all the circumstances of the change of
it out of the histories leaving it free to Historiographers to write what they please and omit what they please Thirdly it is manifest that the Church of the Jewes in the time of Christ was changed both in doctrine and manners from that estat that it was in the time of Aaron Eleazar and sundry others and also the Churches of Galatia and Corinth that they were changed from the estat wherein they were And yet I suppose that neither ye nor any Papist in the earth is able to assign to me all the circumstances of the mutations and changes in the same as the first authors time place c. and yet there was a great change in doctrine and Religion in all these Churches as hath been proved before And we read that our Savior and the Apostles convicted them of a change and yet they designed not the first authors time and place c. The like I say of the Church of Greece Asia and Africa which in number exceeds yours That there is a wonderful change in their Church and Religion ye will not deny or else your Religion is heresie For as said is they acknowledge not your Popes supremacy transubstantiation c. And yet I suppose ye nor no Papist in the earth is able to assign all the circumstances of changes in their Church and Religion which they have presently yea more unable to do this then we are able to do the same in yours I mean not the heresies of Arrius Samosatenus Nestorius Eutyches Sergius and the rest which long ago were damned by the Councils of the Greek Churches For I suppose ye shal not be able to prove that they now maintain these heresies which they condemned and refuted long ago But I mean of the present errors and corruptions in their worship and Religion which now they maintain and profess If then ye judge the Churches of the East heretical because they are not agreeable to your doctrine and Religion of Rome and yet not be able to assign the circumstances of the changes and mutations of the same will ye not grant the same liberty to us to account and judge your Church and Religion failed because it is not agreeable to the doctrine of Jesus Christ set down in the Scripture suppose we could not assign to you the circumstances of the changes of the same Fourthly I say if you have read Epiphanius there ye shal find many heresies which I omit for shortness which he accounts heresies whose beginnings and authors are unknown Fifthly there is such an universal complaint of the monstrous abominations decays in your Religion discipline and manners and that by your own Councils Concil Constant sess 4. 5. Trident. sess 6. Basil sess 2. 3. Fathers Bernard in Cant. 33. Popes Cardinals and Friers that I would have thought it uncredible unless I had read them that either your own mouthes should have so condemned your selves or else that the posterity afterward should have been so shameless as to have boasted of the purity of their Church and Religion Therefore the Council of Trent hath proclaimed it to the world in writ that the Church hath need to be reformed in the head and members Now I ask that of you concerning these abuses in discipline and manners which ye ask of us concerning your doctrine Show me all the circumstances of mutation and change distinctly if ye can what time what place by what author c. such monstrous abominations first brake in in your Church and Religion Now seeing there is no man who hath a spark of judgement that will doubt of that incredible change of manners and discipline in your Church and yet the circumstances of the changes unknown think ye then that ye shal assure men that no changes could fall in your doctrine unless we knew the circumstances of the changes of the same Sixthly the Scripture testifies Matth. 13.27.28 that even the tares which is the evil seed doth not appear so soon as they are sown and that neither the times nor the first author of them was known no not to the most diligent laborers of the Lords ground at the first and yet it was enough to know them to be evil seed by the difference that was seen betwixt them and the good seed suppose the time place and author was unknown at the first So it is proof enough against your doctrine that it is but tares if the difference be made manifest between it and the Lords truth in the Scripture suppose the circumstances of the changes of it cannot be assigned Seventhly error is likened to leaven and a canker which doth not all at once infect the whole mass and fester the whole body but piece and piece so your corruption came not in all at once but piece and piece infected your Church and festered your Religion And therefore it is no wonder suppose the beginnings of infection and circumstances of it hath not been marked For if they had broken in all at once and suddenly overthrown the whole Church it had been no difficulty to have assigned the circumstances of the overthrow of it For if any having a whole constitution with a stroke were slain if a ship with a wave were drowned it were no difficulty to assign the circumstances of the sudden changes But in a consumption and in a leck that hath come in piece and piece in the body and in the ship the beginnings thereof cannot be so easily perceived For a little leck in process of time will sink a great ship And if it be so hard to discern the beginnings of these things which our senses may grope how much more hard is it to perceive the beginnings of these spiritual corruptions which cannot be perceived by the natural man but only by the light of Gods Spirit by the spiritual man Eightly if now it be so in other heresies as the Scripture testifies of them that their beginnings are ofttimes unknown even unto the most diligent laborers of the Lords husbandrie and that they come in by little and little and doth not infect all at once how much more is this true in your Antichristian Religion which as it was fore-told should deceive all Nations and make them drunken with the wine of her fornication And therefore your doctrine is termed in the Scripture an iniquitie but a secret iniquitie an unrighteousness but yet a deceivable unrighteousness a delusion but yet a strong delusion 2. Thess an abomination and spiritual fornication Rev. 17. but yet put in a golden cup that is having the show of godliness and Religion and your Church is called a harlot but yet finely decked in purple c. not like a harlot but a Queen Your Kingdō is called a beast that speaks like the dragon but yet like the lamb in his horns resembling the power and authority of the Lord Jesus Seeing then your Church Kingdom and Doctrine is such a mystery of iniquity hath such a show of godliness hath such a
be the beast Rev. 13.11 and your head to be the Antichrist your doctrine to be delusions 2. Thess 2.3.4.11 and your Rome to be that mystical Babylon Rev. 18 4. And so the Lord hath made them believe and give obedience to that commandment of his Go out of her my people c. That ye call these the true Church that spake against him that lyes in the weights and ballance yet betwixt us For ere ye prove them to be the true Church ye must first prove your doctrine which they then professed to have the warrant out of the Word of God So let them have the name of a Church but of an impure and corrupted Church of a Church infected by the pest of your doctrine oppressed by the tyranny of your Pope and Clergy and consumed by the rotten humors of your Idolatry So then it was not the true Church that is the called ones by the light of the Gospel for they are the true Church that spake against him but only these that were infected and poysoned with your abominations the which I grant did over-spread these Nations as it was fore-told of her Rev. 17.2 and 18.3 and 13.14 And as for these first heads of Religion which he oppugned Of your pardons justification by works and the sacrifice of the Mass their condemnation is set down in the great Register and Testament of Jesus Christ the Lord of life as shal be proved hereafter So that he was not the first that oppugned them Now as to the last the Churches from whom he departed he departed not from their body but from the consumption of your heresie that consumed the body Not from the Church but from the corruptions of your Idolatry and abominations in the Church Not from the Commonwealth of Israel but from your tyranny and oppression of the Commonwealth Not from the city of God but from the pest of your doctrine that infected the city And last of all not from the spiritual communion and society of the Saints of God in these parts but from the communion with Babel with Antichrist with the beast and with the dragon and that at the commandment of the Lord Flie from idolatry Go out of Babel my people 1. Tim. 6.3.4.5 Matth. 7.15 Acts 19. and 8.9 1. Cor. 10.14 2. Cor. 5.14.15.16.17.18 Hosea 4.15 Rev. 18.4 Now after you have assigned the mutations of our Religion since Christ and his Apostles as you think you gather the whole force of it together and makes the stream of your argument to run as strongly as it can upon our Church and Religion that the face and form of it might be so washen away that it be not known to be a true Church Your reason then is this The true Church of Christ hath never failed universally for the space of one day because our Savior hath promised to be with it to the end of the world But our Church was never before Martin Luthers dayes therefore it is not the true Church of Christ As to your proposition if ye take failing for erring in matters of doctrine then I deny your proposition for I hope I have proved sufficiently before that the Church both may err and hath erred in all ages But if you take failing to be utterly abolished and rooted out of the face of the earth then I grant your proposition that God hath ever a Church the Church of his elect with whom he will be to the end of the world And as to your assumption that our Church was never before Martin Luthers dayes I deny it Let us see how ye prove it There was none say ye before his dayes neither visible nor invisible that professed his Religion But how do ye prove that for that is still denied to you For if your Religion hath the Old and New Testament to bear witness to it and Jesus Christ to be the author of it in every point as shal be made manifest by the grace of God then I say whosoever they were from the beginning of the world to this day visible or invisible that professed the true Jesus the true Savior his true doctrine and Sacraments wherein Religion stands they are our predecessors and are of our profession and Religion so then ye should first if ye had gone squarely to work have disproved the heads of our Religion not to have their warrant from the tables of Christs Testament ere ye had concluded that we had none of our profession and Religion before Martin Luther And this is the point you should have begun at for it is not the Church that makes the Religion but the Religion that makes the Church Have we a warrant out of the Word of God for our Religion then are we the true Church and the successors of all them who ever from the beginning of the world have professed the same Have we not this warrant then I grant you we have no true Church So there is the point of our controversie whither our doctrine be from God out of his Word or not But how prove ye that Martin Luther had none of his profession before him First you gathered upon the former things that all the true Churches said against him and that he departed from them unto the which I answered before that these was not the true Church but only so many of every Nation who was deceived by your doctrine and whereof the Lord did cure a great many by his ministery and by the ministery of others whom the Lord did stir up since so that neither did the true Church who saw the truth speak against nor yet did he depart from their societie Next as the Lord had a true Church in Israel in the time of Elias even these who did not bow their knee to Baal 1. Kings 19 10.18 who was neither known to Elias the Prophet nor yet to the persecuters so did the Lord in the midst of your darkness and Idolatry reserve to himself a true Church even these hundred forty and four thousand which John saw standing with the Lamb on mount Sion Rev. 14 1. who did not defile themselves with your Idolatry and did not worship the beast and receive his mark which suppose neither ye nor we had known yet the Lord did reserve them as he promised Thirdly I say Martin Luther had sundry who professed his Religion immediatly before him who was even known to the world as I shal prove afterward Your next proof is taken from a testimony of one of our own Writers where ye alledge that it is written of Martin Luther and Zuinglius that they were the first that came to the knowledge of the Gospel I say ye are not faithful in citing of this testimony for it saith not that they were the first that came to the knowledge of the Gospel but these are the words That it was an easie thing to them meaning of your Church to devise against us meaning the English Protestants as ye call them these cursed speaches
when Martin Luther and Zuinglius first came to the Gospel The Latin words are cum Martinus Luther Zuinglius primum accessissent ad Evangelium So it saith not that they were the first that came to the Gospel but that it was easie to you to spew out cursed speaches when they came first to the Gospel So that this word primum that is first is not in comparison with them that knew the Gospel before but in comparison with that time in the which they themselves knew not the Gospel It is an adverb of time and you take it for an adjective noun But there is a vail over your eyes that ye can neither see what we or your selves writes So then to conclud seeing the Religion which Martin Luther taught hath the warrant from Christs Testament and seeing all that ever professed the true Religion that hath Christ to be the author of it in his Scripture visible or invisible are his predecessors Therefore the Religion which Martin Luther taught was the true Religion And seeing your Religion hath not Christ to be the author of it in his latter Testament but is that apostasie and defection that Antichristian Kingdom that was fore-spoken of in the Scripture Therefore I conclud that your Church and Religion which he oppugned is not the true Church and Religion but that Antichristian Kingdom And this for the first part of your objection Now we come to the second M. Gilbert Brown As for the other part of the objection which he alledges to be ours that is that our Religion was never said against we say not so for why all hereticks and others infected with false doctrine have ever said against the same almost at all times For how soon that Christ our Savior planted the truth the Devil immediatly sew popple in the same according to the parable set down in S. Matthew M. John Welsch his Reply I come now to that part which ye say is untruly alledged of you which moved you to say that either I knew not your proofs or if I knew them that I altered the same that I might the better oppugn my own invention Of my knowledge of your proofs I will speak nothing But let us see whither this be my invention or not or rather your own proof You for the confirmation of the truth of your Church and Religion brought in this as a proof that I nor no Minister in Scotland was able to assign the true Church that spake against it Either then ye prove nothing or else this must be one of your proofs because it was never spoken against by a true Church Now compare these words with mine and see whither I speak ignorantly or untruly of your proofs I said that ye affirmed your Religion to be true because it was never spoken against Here our words are one except this that ye add be a true Church I understand the same and therefore I gave the instances first of Christ and his Apostles next of the primitive Church thirdly of these that lived in Popery which spake against your Religion all which I appeal your conscience whither think ye that I judge them a true Church or not Now in that ye expound it otherwise of hereticks this is neither my words nor meaning but your own invention So that by this it may appear that either ye have not understood my words alledging your objection or else ye have altered the meaning of the same that ye might the more easily answer to your own inventions and gain-say my words M. John Welsch his Answer to the objection Your Religion of the Roman Church was never instistituted nor preached neither by Christ nor by his Apostles as I offer me to prove by their writings which is the only touchstone whereby all Religion should be and must be tryed M. Gilbert Brown I think in this M. John takes upon him an impossibility for it is said that it is impossible to prove a negative proposition except it be set down in the Word of God which is of authority and that I am sure he cannot find because Papistry by him is not so old as the Word of God is But in the mean time M. John proves nothing He offers very fair and when ever he proves any thing contrary to us with Gods grace he shal get an answer And note here that M. John can say nothing to our argument for to it he gives no answer M. John Welsch his Reply In your answer to this Section First ye think it impossible because of the form of it Next ye say it is but an offer and I prove nothing Thirdly that I answer nothing to your argument nor can answer nothing Now of all these in order And first to the form ye think it impossible to prove because it is a negative proposition Is not this a negative proposition that the Popes of Rome are not the Antichrist You cannot deny it Again I ask is this sentence to be found in the whole Scripture I suppose ye will never be able to find it Then I say if it be true that ye say then ye your self in your book and this your answer and Bellarmin lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. and Sanderus 40. demonstrations and all the rest of you that takes in hand to prove the Pope not to be the Antichrist takes in hand in your judgement an impossibility and so do you indeed not because it is a negative proposition but because he is the Antichrist in very truth What would the Pope your head think of you if he heard you say so Certainly I think he would not inrol your name among the defenders of his Catholick faith whereof this is the foundation Secondly is there not many formal syllogisms that have the proposition or assumption negatives and will you say they cannot be proved if the matter be true because they are negatives What is this but to raise the foundation of Logick and Raison Logick is not Rhetorick and Physick is not Logick both these are negative propositions and I suppose neither of them are so found in the Scripture and will you say that it is impossible to prove them because they are negatives What you mean by this I understand not unless you do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strive about words prove and improve forbidden by the Apostle 2. Tim. 2.14 Thirdly ye except these negative propositions which are set down in the Word of God which hath authority as ye say I assume But your Religion in substance is condemned in the Word of God therefore by your own confession it may be proved suppose it be negative For Nazianzen saith lib. 5. de Theologia That these sentences that are collected out of the Scripture by a necessary consequence are of the same truth and authority with these sentences that are expresly set down in the Scripture And whereas ye say Papistrie by me is not so old as the Scripture I grant that What then Therefore it is not
condemned in the Scripture I deny that For Antichrist and his Kingdom are not so old as the Scripture and yet the Scripture condemned it For not only condemns it present heresies but also the heresies that was to come And seeing Papistrie is that Antichristian Religion as shal be made manifest by Gods grace therefore it hath the express condemnation of it in the Word of God The form therefore of it no wayes will make it impossible to be proved As for the next thing that I prove nothing bu offers very fair I answer it was not my purpose then but I hope ye shal have a proof now of that which I offered then As to the third then that I can say nothing to your argument which ye would hâ—ve the Reader to mark When I read this I marked this that ye would earnestly have the Reader perswaded of the invincibleness of your argument and my inability to answer But what bring ye with you to perswade him of the same Your reason is because I have not answered it Will this follow I have not suppose it were so as ye say therefore I cannot It will not follow I have not answered I cannot answer to it But as you have a new Theology so have you a new Logick But said I nothing to your argument What is not answered sufficiently in the same Your argument was the antiquity of your Religion and continuance of it from Christ by a lineal succession never interrupted c. and the novelty of ours My answer was Yours was not institut by Christ nor his Apostles in his Scripture as ours was and yours was gain-said in the chief points by the testimonies of the Fathers the first six hundred years and the principal points of our Religion confirmed by sundry of their testimonies Thirdly yours was that Antichristian apostasie that the Scripture fore told should come and in the hight of your tyranny and Idolatry was gain-said by many before Martin Luther and ours was professed by sundry before him whose names I set down all which I offered to prove and now shal do by Gods grace Now you say this is no answer But is that no answer that cuts the very throat of your Religion if it be verified and invalidities your argument that it do never stand up to under-prop your Religion again For that Religion which is not instituted by Christ in the Scripture whose main foundations is gain-said by the testimonies of sundry of the Fathers of the first 600. year which is Antichristian and which was gain-said by the Saints that they persecuted and slew hath not the continuance from Christ by a lineal succession never interrupted nor spoken against by a true Church till Martin Luthers days This I am sure ye will not deny But your Religion is such as I offered then to prove and now have in some points and shal in other some points by Gods grace The which if it be verified then I hope ye will not deny but that your Religion hath neither antiquity continuance nor succession from Christ till Martin Luthers dayes And that Religion cannot be newly forged and invented since Martin Luthers dayes which hath the warrant and institution of it in the Scripture c. This you cannot deny But our Religion is such as then I offered to prove and now have done in some points and shal do in other some points by Gods grace Therefore our Religion cannot be newly forged and invented c. but is the only true Religion So that this answer if it be proved doth sufficiently vindicat our Religion from novelty Now if this be no answer to your argument then I say no more but ye will answer it the sooner And because ye formed your own argument your self in your answer to me and I have answered to it else therefore I will now insist no further upon it And as for your lineal succession of Bishops it will come in question afterward therefore I omit it now SECTION V. Concerning the Judge of Controversies namely whither GOD speaking in the Scripture be Judge of Controversies Maister Gilbert Brown AS for the written Word it is true that it is a most faithful witness and it be not corrupted to Christ and his Church as our Savior testifies himself John 5.39 of the which opinion there is sundry Protestants chiefly young Merchiston in his discourse upon the Revelation in the 21. proposition and other places 2. Cor. 3.6 John 6.63 But that it ought to be Judge to decide all controversies in Religion M. John hath no Scripture for the same It is the holy Ghost that must be Judge and the holy Writ must bear witness thereto For this cause the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth John 14.25.26 This holy Ghost gives judgement by the Pastors of the true Church as he did by the Apostles and Priests at the Council of Jerusalem It hath pleased the holy Ghost and us saith the Apostle Acts 15.19.28 and so he hath ever done since the beginning of the Church when it was troubled with heresies and false doctrine as the Councils of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon M. John Welsch his Reply You first here decline the Scripture as Judge to decide all controversies in Religion And you are not the first that have done this but all your Roman Clergy with you And suppose there were not another thing to make the consciences of men suspect your Religion that it is not found in the book of God yet this is a great presumption that ye give out of it your selves For what may all men think of the same but that if ye were perswaded in your conscience to justify your Religion to be from Jesus Christ in his written Word ye would never decline the judicatorie of it and the declining of the same is an evident demonstration that ye are privy to your selves in your own consciences that it is not from God in his written Word But wherefore say I that ye are privy to your selves of this Ye have made it known to the world by your confession in your own books that many of the chief points of your Religion controverted between you and us which ye maintain have not their original beginning nor authors in the Scriptures but in your unwritten traditions So Petrus a Soto a Papist of great name confessed He calls all these observations Apostolick traditions whose beginning principium origo author cannot be found in the whole Scriptures in his book against Brentius And then he reckons out a number of the chief and principal heads of their Religion saying Of the which sort are the oblation of the sacrifice of the altar the invocation or prayers to Saints the prayer for the dead the supremacie of the Pope of Rome the consecration of the water in baptism the whole sacraments of orders matrimonie pennance confirmation and extream unction the merits of works
without further tryal because he hath so decreed it What is this but not only to make him equal to the Lord For God only hath that priviledge to be believed because he so speaks mans testimony so far only is to be credited as it may be warranted by the Scripture but also to preferr his authoritie to the voice of God in his Scripture seeing he is Judge of the same and not that onlie but to hang my salvation upon his voice and testimonie And seeing ye will have them Judges what is the cause that their Canons Laws and determinations are not as authentick as the Scripture and insert in the Canon of the Scripture But let us see your reasons First you say That the holy Ghost was given to the Church by the Father and the Son that he might teach it all truth I grant this that the holy Ghost is given to every one of the elect as wel Pastor as people to lead them in all truth in so far as may bring them to salvation And yet ye will not make every one of them Judges next every one of the elect may err notwithstanding of this promise suppose not totally and finally and therefore cannot be Judges of Religion Secondly you alledge the example of the Council of the Apostles and Elders It is true in that controversie that arose among the Christians concerning the observing of the ceremonies of the law of Moses that the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church after reasoning defined the same and writes the same to be observed by the Disciples everie where but first they were Apostles and was infallibly governed by Gods Spirit that they could not err in teaching and writing but your Pastors are not Apostles and may err Next they assemble with the Elders and the whole Church and all with one accord defines Acts 15.12.22.23 You in your Council excludes all except your Bishops to be ordinary Judges to give out judgement and your Popes neither Elder nor brethren having power of voting with you Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 1. Thirdly they define according to the Scripture saying As it is written c. Act. 15.15 This controversie to make us to understand if we will not be more then blind that this rule should be followed in all Councils to determine in controversies according to the Scripture Upon the which I reason if the Apostles who had that high measure of Gods Spirit which never man had since so that in writing and teaching they could not err if they I say did determine the controversies of Religion according to the Scripture how much more then are all Pastors since who may err both severally and jointly together in a Council bound to follow the same rule And whereas ye call their Elders Priests you stile them not as the holy Ghost hath stiled them there so there they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Elders and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sacrificing Priests as ye suppone Your third reason is the practise and custom of the Church in deciding the controversies of Religion in Councils we grant that this is a very commodious mean to search and find out the truth by the Scripture For first the more they are that seek the truth it is the more easily found Next the consent of many in determining a truth will be of greater authority to repress hereticks then if it were agreed upon only by a few But yet they should determine nothing but that which is warranted by the Scripture and their determinations only in so far forth to be received as is agreeable to the same And this we grant hath been done in the Council of the primitive Church And therefore the Emperor Constantine speaking to the Fathers of the Council of Nice saith Sunt libri Prophetici Apostolici qui apertè quid credendum sit docent c. That is there are the Books of the Prophets and Apostles who teacheth plainly what we should believe All contention therefore laid aside let us take the soveraign decision of these things which are called in controversie out of the Scriptures which are inspired by God And this we grant and this we require But that Councils ought to determin any thing of their own authority in matters of Religion which binds the conscience without the warrant of the Word that we deny Master Gilbert Brown It is a wonder that M. John will refer any thing to the written Word seeing that he and his have no warrant that the same is the Word of God but by the authority of the Roman or Papist Church For understand there was no Church worthie of credit immediatly before Luther but that Church Master John Welsch his Reply You wonder that I refer any thing to the Scripture But what a wōder is this that ye are so far blinded of God that you think that a wonder in me which Abraham hath done which the Prophets have done which our Savior and his Apostles have done and which the Fathers have done for all these have referred the infallible testimony and decision of the will of God concerning his worship unto the Scriptures Luke 16 29. John 5 39. Acts 26.22 Rom. 12. and 16.26 2. Tim. 3.16 2. Pet. 1.10 Rev. 1 3. cap. ult yea which your self also hath done for ye make it a witness But what hath moved you to think this a wonder in me which so many and your self also have done before me Because say ye that he and his that is our Church have no warrant that it is the Word of God but by the authoritie of the Roman or Papist Church I grant indeed that you and your Church are plunged in this blindness and miserie that all the warrant that you have not only of the Scriptures themselves that they are inspired of God but also of all your doctrine and Religion is the testimony of your Roman Church that is of your Pope and Clergy for so ye interpret the Church So Bellarmin grants de Sacr. lib. 2. cap. 25. That all the certainty of all doctrine depends upon the authority of the present Church meaning the Pope and his Clergy And Stapleton saith lib. 1 contra Whitak de author script cap. 10. That it is no absurd thing not to believe God but for the testimony of the Church Pigius saith That it is not needful to believe all that Matthew and John writ in their Gospels to be true because that they might fail in memory and lie as all men may do Ecclesiast hierar lib. 1. cap. 2. And Hermannus saith That the Scripture would be of no more authority then the fables of Esop were not the testimony of the Church And so blind and miserable must you be that hangs the certaintie of all Religion and of man his salvation upon so smal a threed as the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What peace in conscience can any man have that professes your Religion which teaches that the
26.26.27 bread and wine and having given (f) Luke 22.19 thanks to his Father of heaven (g) Mark 14.22 blessed the same by the which (h) 1. Cor. 10.16 blessing and heavenly words he made them his body and blood as I said before and (i) Luke 22.29 gave or offered himself then for them that is for his And last of all gave the same body and blood to his Apostles to be eaten which we call to (k) 1. Cor 10.16 communicat And when he had done the same he commanded his Apostles and by them the lawful Pastors of the Church till the worlds end to do the same for the (l) Luke 22.19 remembrance of him And seeing that our Priests do the same as our Savior did how can M. John say that our Religion in this was not instituted by Christ Master John Welsch his Reply I come to another point of your doctrine concerning the sacrifice of the Mass which suppose ye call blessed yet is it most abominable idolatry as by the grace of God shal be made manifest And first concerning the word it self MASS you are of such variety of opinions among your selves concerning it that (a) As Doctor Bellarmin in his answer to Duplessis Mornay de Eucharist lib. 11. cap. 1. Genebrard in Liturg. S. Denis from the word MISSAH Deut. 16.10 that properly signifieth sufficiency but Bellarmin refutes this lib. 1. de Missa cap. 1. some of you saith it is taken from the Hebrew some (b) Bulinger ibidem from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that signifies a secret sanctificatioÌ„ from the which comes mystery from the Greek some (c) As Bellarmin ibidem and sundry others from mitto missio or dimissio from the Latin and (d) Some because the sacrifice and prayers is sent to God in the same as Hugo de S. Victor de sacram lib. 2. part 8. cap. ult some saith it is called the Mass for one cause and (e) Some because an angel as they say is sent unto the same as Lombard in 4. sent dist 13. Thomas part 3. quaest 83. And some because the people is dismissed and sent forth as Bellar. lib. 1. de Missa cap. 1. some for another I will only speak this of it that it is usually taken by the ancient Writers for the dismission or skailing as we call it of the Church after the publick service was done to God as Bellarmin grants in the first acception of this word Mass And therefore in the end of your Mass the Deacon crys Ite missa est that is Go your way the Congregation is dismissed But now the Papists takes not the word in this sense for the skailing of the Church or dismission of the people after the service of preaching prayer and so forth but for that abominable sacrifice of theirs wherein as they suppone they offer up Christ his very body and blood in a sacrifice for the quick and the dead as M. Gilbert doth here And for this cause they call this sacrifice the Mass that is first sent from the Father to us that Christ his body and blood might be with us next sent from us to the Father that he may interceed and may be for us with the Father as Durandus lib. 4. ration divin testifieth But how can he be sent from them to heaven seeing he descends in the mouth stomack and belly of the Priest for to be sent down to the belly of the Priest to be sent up to heaveÌ„ are things contrary So by this stile of the Mass as they take it it is plain that either Christ descends from heaven in the earth dayly in the Mass which some of them grants also Turrian 1 tract cap. 11 fol. 59. which is contrary to an article of our faith That he sits at the right hand of hâ—s Father whom the heavens must contain until the time that all things be restored Acts 3.21 or else their Mass-Priests dust and ashes are the creators of their Creator which is a blasphemy Thus much now for the name of the Mass which all Christians should abhor according to that of David That he would not take the name of false Gods in his mouth Psal 16 4. For that word which is proponed by men for an Article of our Faith which is not found in the Scripture neither in proper terms nor yet in substance and by necessary consequence out of the same should be rejected by the Church of God as a profane and a bastard word But the Mass is such For it is proponed by the Church of Rome as an Article of our Faith and yet it is neither found in proper termes nor in substance nor by any necessary consequence out of the Scripture Therefore it should be rejected as profane and idolatrous by the Church of God This for the name Now to the matter This is one of the greatest controversies betwixt you and us concerning your sacrifice of the Mass which as ye account it most heavenly so we account it most abominable as that which injures the Son of God which derogats from his death and passion which is injurious to his everlasting Priesthood which is idolatrous vain needless and fruitless which hinders and overthrows the true service of God all which shal be made plain of it by Gods grace The matter of our controversie therefore is Whither Jesus Christ God and man his body and blood be personally and corporally offered up in your sacrifice of the Mass as ye call it And whither this your sacrifice be a propiciatory sacrifice for the sins of the quick and the dead This your Church affirms and holds and this we deny Now let us see your reasons first and then we will set down what reasons we have for us out of the Word of God to the contrary As to yours First ye say it way prefigured by the Law of Moses Next prophesied of by the Prophets And thirdly done and instituted by Christ our Savior and commanded by him to be done to the end of the world As to the first This sacrifice was prefigured by the sacrifices of the Old Testament for the which purpose ye quote Levit. 2. and 6.20 Unto the which I answer That the sacrifices of the Old Testament were figures and shadows of that great and bloody sacrifice of Christ Jesus ones offered up upon the cross never to be offered up again as the Apostle saith Heb. 9.25.26.27.28 and of our spiritual sacrifices and service to God whereof the Apostle speaks in these places here cited Rom. 12.1 Heb. 13.15.16 The which also were fulfilled in that one and only sacrifice of himself upon the cross for the sins of the world and are fulfilled in our spiritual sacrifices of our selves and of the calves of out lips continually But that these were figures of your abominable sacrifice in the Mass there is not a syllable in the whole Scripture to prove the same For that which was prefigured
Sixtus Senesis in lib. Operis Biblioth Cajetanus in fine comment Veter Test Arias Montanus in editione quadam Hebr. Bibli cum interlineari Hugo Cardinalis are against you and with us in the books of Apocrypha Gelasius de duabus naturis in Christo is against your Transubstantiation also against your Communion under one kind And Pope Adrian the 6. against this that the Pope cannot err and teach heresies Panormitan against this that it is not lawful to Ministers to marry after their ordination Bellarm. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 19. Idem lib. 2. de purg cap. 4. Michael Bai Gerson and Roffensis all Papists against your venial sins Bellarm. lib. de imaginibus cap. 8. Abulensis and Durandus and Peresius Papists against your making of the Images of the Trinity A great many of you as Alexander Thomas Cajetan Bonaventure Marsilius Almain Carthusianus and Capreolus teach That that same worship should be given to the Image which is given to that which the Image represents And yet Durandus and Alphonsus a Castro and others is against this Therefore either the one or the other is not of your Religion And ye your self if ye be measured by this measure is not a right Papist because you dissent from many of them in many things as hath been proved before And certainly M. Gilbert if this reason of yours hold forth you shal cut off from your profession such a number of Popes Councils Jesuits Cardinals and Doctors from your Religion that it is to be feared that they cut you off from being a right defender of their Catholick Faith yea from being a member of their Synagogue that for the defence thereof is compelled to cut off so many from the same And secondly I say your reports concerning their doctrine is not to be credited but their own Apologies and Writings whereby it appears that it hath been always your fashion the more to discredit them to charge them with a number of absurd opinions which they never held As for example you charge here Waldus and his followers to have had their wives and all other things common which is your calumny of them and not their practise or doctrine For Gulielmus Parvus writeth that their life was commendable And Reynerus in his Book of Inquisitions one of your own Religion a Writer of 300. years ago who was often at the examination of them as he himself saith confesseth That they had great show of holy life and that they believed all things well of God and all the articles contained in the Creed and lived justly before men and chargeth them that they hated and blasphemed solam Romanam Ecclesiam the Romish Church only So then if his report be true as I hope ye will not gainsay they were both far from that error for that were neither to believe all things well of God nor yet to have a show of holy life and to live justly before men and also they were of our Religion in all things And where you say that we renew many old condemned heresies I answer That neither the doctrine which I affirmed they taught here was heresies nor yet themselves hereticks But you and your Church who have condemned them for the truth of God and have renewed old condemned heresies as shal be proved afterward And we have renewed no heresie at all but only the truth of God which your Church hath obscured and buried Therefore your conclusion is false that our Religion was never professed in all points as it is now in Scotland before in no Countrey no not say you by any one man For it was taught and professed by Christ and his Apostles and also by all the primitive Churches in their dayes in all points throughout all the parts of the world where they preached the Gospel as it is now in Scotland as we offer to prove by their writings and I have proved the same in sundry heads here Next the substance thereof was continued many hundred years in the Churches of Christ while partly by the heresies that sprang up for the popple was soon sown among the good seed and the Mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Apostles dayes and partly by the Mahomet and partly by the darkness of Popery it was corrupted piece and piece And what difference can you find between the Religion that the Waldenses professed and us if ye will give credit to their Apologies and Reynerus testimonies of them As for M. Robert Bruces testimony which ye produce it serves no wise to confirm your purpose but seeing ye abuse the testimonies of Scripture it is no wonder suppose ye abuse the testimonies of men For it is most true which he affirms that the truth of God hath continued for that space in this Kingdom without heresie or schism as we never read it did in any Nation in the earth in such purity without heresie and schism for such a long space And yet it follows not but it hath dwelt in sundry Churches in such purity before suppose not so long together which you omit in your conclusion Doth it follow by his testimonie but that our Religion hath been preached and professed in all true Churches in all points suppose not so long in such purity as it is in Scotland Neither doth it follow but that the substantial and main points of our Religion have been professed in all Christian Churches longer then that space suppose mixed either with some heresies or schismes So you must coin a new Logick M Gilbert before ye can confirm your proposition by his testimonie Master Gilbert Brown But here it is to be noted also that M. John can find none before the year of Christ 1158. that said against the Pope and his Religion and none immediatly before Luther the space of an hundred years and more So the Church was without his Doctors eleven hundred years and fifty or thereabout And such like Martin Luther had no predecessors to whom he succeeded in his Religion Master John Welsch his Reply You not two things here which are both false The one that I can find none that said against the Pope and his Religion before the year of Christ 1158. For our Savior and his Apostles and sundry learned Fathers in all ages and Councils both General and Provincial and some of your own Doctors and Popes have spoken against the Monarchie of your Pope and your Doctrine and Religion as I have proved before And Reynerus a man of your own Religion testifies that some said The Waldenses who had the same Religion which we profess was continued from Sylvesters dayes who lived about the 320. year of God And some said that it continued even from the Apostles days Therefore the first is false The second thing is that I can find none before Luther immediatly the space of an hundred years and more I see you are not ashamed to speak any thing for the defence of your Kingdom were it never so manifestly false
For if appears that either ye are not acquainted with the Histories of that age or else ye dissemble it of purpose for John Wicleff he left so many behind him in England who professed our Religion that though your Prelats did molest them what they could yet they and their favorers in short time grew to such strength and multitude that by the year 1422. which was an hundred years immediatly before Luther Henry Chichesley the Archbishop of Canterbury wrot to the Pope that they all could not be suppressed they were so many but by force of war The professors of our Religion began to gather so great force in Bohemia after the burning of John Hus and Jerome of Prague at the Council of Constance which was about the year 1417. which was just an hundred years immediatly before Luther that they were able not only to defend themselves by force of armes against the tyrannie of your Popes but also obtained many notable victories against the strongest power that the Pope did raise against them In England William Taylor was burnt anno 1422. and two years after that William White was burnt And betwixt that time and 1430. Father Abraham of Colchester John Wadden and Richard Hovington were burnt And after that Richard Wiche and John Goose one Braban and one Jerome and others with him were burnt Hieronymus Savanarola a Monk in Italie with two others named Dominick and Sylvester were condemned to death at Florence in the year 1500. with sundry others whom for shortness I omit here Now surely I cannot but wonder M. Gilbert that ye should have been so impudent as to have set it down in writ that I could get none that professed our Religion an hundred years immediatly before Martin Luther But the Reader may gather what credit he may give to your notes and yet with such impudent lies ye blind the poor people Upon the which I gather that both these conclusions of yours is false For the Church of Christ in all ages even from the Apostles days to this day hath ever had her own teachers and professors unto whom Martin Luther hath succeeded in his Religion suppose not in the like frequencie and puritie and that by reason partly of the smoke of that bottemless pit that is of your doctrine which darkned both the Sun and the air Rev. 9.2 that is both teachers and people and partly by your extream persecution whereby ye made war with the Saints of God and overcame them Rev 13 7. But your smoke will evanish away at the last and the clear light of the Lord shal shine more and more maugre all your hearts SECTION XXV That the Reformed Churches have not renewed old condemned Heresies Master Gilbert Brown BUt that M. John shal not think that we slander him and his â—iâ—h old condemned heresies let him read S. Augustin Epiphanius and others noted here as of these and many the like 1. Novatus forsook the Pope of Rome Cornelius and caused others do the like as Eusebius hist lib. 6. cap. 33. and Nicephorus report lib. 6. cap. 30. 2. Aërus the heretick denyed that offering or prayers should be done for the dead and that fasting should be free as S. Augustine and Epiphane declare haeres 75. 3. Eunomius and Aërius held that only faith justifieth as Augustin haeres 55. lib. de fide operibus and Epiphanius haeres 76. write Master John Welsch his Reply Now are we by Gods grace come unto your last calumnie in affirming that we renew old condemned heresies This is indeed M. Gilbert a heavie challenge if it were true but it is but like the rest of your calumnies yea it hath less appearance of truth then any thing which ye have spoken against us A liar M. Gilbert shal not enter in that heavenly city but his portion shal be in that lake that burne with fire and brimstone Rev. 19.20 22.15 And he that slandereth his neighbor much more then he who slandereth the truth of God shal not rest in the Lords holy mountain Psal 15 3. But to come to the first Novatus intruded himself in another mans charge and caused set up himself against Cornelius the lawful Pastor of the Church in Rome then and that craftily and withdrew many of his flock from him which is as contrary to our doctrine as black to white For we teach that every Pastor should have his own particular flock as Cornelius had then in Rome and no man should intrude himself in another mans charge as he did So this is a calumny M. Gilbert But your Popes are like Novatus who not only have disturbed all the Christian Congregations in Europe almost by setting up and thrusting down such Pastors as they would but also all the Kingdoms in Europe As for this doctrine of Aerius I answer you as ye did me I contend not whether he taught this doctrine or not for the Scriptures have taught the same But our contention is whether they be heresie or not which you have not proved nor ever will be able to prove by the Scripture It is true Epiphanius and Augustin following him reckon him among hereticks but Theodoretus in his Book de fabulis Judaeorum and the Ecclesiastical History reckon him not among hereticks and he was not condemned for an heretick in any Council that therefore which he taught according to the Scripture we imbrace But as for the errors of the Aërians which are errors indeed and which are ascribed unto them as the damning of marriage urging of continency requiring them whom they receive to their fellowship to forsake their own proper things These heresies I say your Church hath renewed who damns marriage and urges continency in your Clergy and receives none to your religious Orders but such as refuse their own proper things As to the third the Aërian and Eunomian heresies they secluded holiness of life from that faith of theirs and taught such a faith that might stand with whatsoever sins and with perseverance in them Will you stand to this M. Gilbert before the Lord that we teach such doctrine Is not this our doctrine that only living faith which works by love and brings forth good fruits doth justifie But you are like to them that know no other justifying faith but such a faith as both the reprobats and the Devils may have So this is your third calumnie M. Gilbert Brown 4. Simon Magus Marcion and Manichaeus denyed that man had free-will as Augustin haeres 46. Jerome and Epiphanius haeres 42. make mention 5. Jovinianus affirmed that Priests marriage was lawful after the lawful vow of chastity He moved sundry Nuns to marry in the city of Rome He made fasting and abstinence from meat superfluous as Augustin writes of him haeres 82. item lib. 1. cap. 7 de peccat merit remiss 6. Vigilantius denyed the prayer to Saints as S. Jerome contra Vigilantium writes He despised the burning of lights and candles in the Churches in the day
Antichrist is called an adversary that is opposed and contrary to God and that not in life only but in doctrine Religion and government and that not in one point only but almost in all the substantial points thereof The which mark the Popes of Rome bear and that not only in their lives but also in the whole substantial points of Religion And to make this clear besides that which hath been spoken we shal compare the doctrine of Jesus Christ and the government of his Kingdom set down in the Scripture with the doctrine of the Popes and the manner of their government that the contrariety of them may be known so that it shal be seen that cold is no more contrary to heat and black to white then Papism to Christianity and the Religion of the Church of Rome to the Religion of Christ Jesus The doctrine of Christ stands especially in these two things in the knowledge of his person and in the knowledge of his offices And therefore the Apostle saith I desire to know nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified 1. Cor. 2.2 And Christ himself saith It is life eternal to know thee to be the only true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ John 17 3. The doctrine of the Popes of Rome overthrows both And first to prove this concerning his person the Scripture testifies that Jesus Christ is conceived of the substance of the Virgin Mary and that he hath but one true body made of the seed of David and of the seed of the woman Rom. 1.3 Gal. 4. 4 and not many and that he is like unto us in all things except sin Heb. 2.17 The doctrine of the Church of Rome is that Christ Jesus his body is made of the bread and wine in the Sacrament their doctrine makes him to have as many bodies as there is bits of bread in the Sacrament and not to be like his brethren in all things except sin Bellar. lib. 3. de Eucharistia fol. 399. Pope John 22. lib. orat in scr antidotarius animae for his brethren can be but in one place at once with their own due proportion visibly But their doctrine of Transubstantiation makes him to be both in heaven and earth at once in heaven visibly in earth invisibly in heaven with his own quantity and proportion in earth without his natural proportion and not in one place of the earth only but in innumerable places thereof at once so that this main foundation of mans salvation without the which there is no eternal life concerning the truth of Christs manhood made of the woman is utterly defaced and overthrown by the doctrine of the Popes of Rome in making him to have infinit bodies not made of the feed of the woman but of bread and wine or at the least made of two diverse substances And as they overthrow the doctrine of his person so they overthrow the doctrine of his offices His offices are three a Prophet a Priest and a King which are all overthrown by them As he is a Prophet he hath revealed his Fathers whole will unto his servants John 1.18 and hath left it in register in his latter Testament and hath forbidden to add empair or to alter the same Deut. 4.2 and hath pronounced a wo a curse unto them that adds empairs or alters the same Rev. 22.18 Gal. 1.8 and that because it is sufficient to make a man wise unto salvation and to make the man of God perfect unto every good work 2. Tim. 3.15.16 and because it is pure and perfect and easie to all them that will understand it Prov. 8.9 Psal 19.8.9 13. 119. But they have many wayes corrupted this Testament of Christ by mingling and adulterating the same First in that they give divine authority to the Books called Apocrypha which are humain Concil Trident. Sess 4. Next in receiving and commanding others to receive traditions with equal reverence and affection with the Scripture Thirdly in their corrupt Latin translation which they have made authentical which some of themselves confess have missed sometimes the meaning of the holy Ghost Bud. annot prior in Pandect Andrad lib. 4. Arias Montanus Tom. 8. Bibl. Reg. in praefat Fourthly in joyning with the Commandments of God their own commandments and that not as things indifferent but as necessary to salvation Concil Trident. Sess 6 cap. 10. Fifthly in condemning all sense and meaning of the holy Scripture but that which they hold themselves Sess 4. Last of all in quarrelling the Scripture of imperfection obscurity and ambiguity calling it dead and dumb like a nose of wax They therefore who have altered added and corrupted the Testament of Jesus Christ confirmed by his death which he hath left in writ for to instruct his Church in all things and to make her wise to salvation and perfect to every good work doth spoil the Lord Jesus of his Prophetical office But the doctrine of the Church of Rome hath done so Ergo they spoyl Jesus Christ of his Prophetical office Thirdly they are no less sacrilegious and injurious to his Priesthood His Priesthood stands in two things First in purchasing unto us by the vertue of that one sacrifice once offered up upon the Cross an everlasting redemption Next in making continual intercession for us with his Father Heb. 9.11.12 15.24.25.26.27.28 the which both are overthrown by the doctrine of the Church of Rome As to the first it is overthrown many wayes as first our Savior saith That his soul was sorrowful unto the death and that he swat drops of blood Matth. 26.37.38 and he sent up strong cryes and supplications with tears in the dayes of his flesh Heb. 5.7 Luke 22.44 and therefore he thrise upon his knees prays That if it had been possible that cup might be removed from him Matth. 27.39 And upon the Cross through the sense and feeling of that wrath he breaks forth in that complaint My God my God why hast thou forsaken me All which do testifie that he suffered more then a common death to wit the terrors of the wrath of God which was due to the sins of all the elect But the doctrine of the Church of Rome ranverseth this doctrine of our salvation and teacheth that Christ suffered not the wrath of God upon his soul which if it be true then Christ hath not payed our debt sufficiently for our debt was not only the natural death of the body but the wrath of God upon the soul and therefore the Scripture saith The soul that sinneth shal die the death Ezech. 18.20 Secondly the Scripture testifieth that Christs death and blood is a sufficient ransom for our sins and a sufficient satisfaction unto the justice of God Heb. 10.10.14 John 19.28 1. Tim. 2.6 1. Pet. 2.24 1. John 1.7 They by the contrary joyn to his satisfaction the satisfactions of men both in this life and in the life to come in Purgatory and that not only for their own sins but for
that doth believe that Popery is the most abominable Idolatry imaginable to wit to worship the handy-work of the Baker and wood and stone c. and considers what severe threatnings he hath denounced against Idolatry namely That they shal be shut out of that New Jerusalem Rev. 22.15 and shal drink of the wine of the wrath of GOD and shal be tormented day and night before the holy Angels and before the Lamb and the smoke of their torment shal ascend for evermore and they shal have no rest Rev. 14.9 And that he is a jealous GOD visiting not only this iniquity of Idolatry upon themselves but likewise upon their children to the third and fourth generation and is not much troubled to hear and see so many souls seduced and led aside thereto and doth not judge it of his concernment to lay out himself to the utmost for discovering the snare pit that is laid for entraping and ruining eternally of poor souls Therefore we hope as our endeavors shal be peace to us so we hope it shal be acceptable to all the lovers of truth That this prayerful Treatise of that great wrestler with GOD may be blessed for convincing of gain-sayers informing establishing and confirming the LORDS people in the truth and for stirring up and awaking zeal love and repentance in the godly shal be the earnest prayer of Your servant for CHRISTS sake MATT. CRAFORD TO THE RIGHT EXCELLENT AND MIGHTY PRINCE JAMES THE VI. KING OF SCOTLAND c. Grace and Peace be multiplied I Hope it shal not be accounted presumption most Noble Prince to offer to your Majesty the first fruits of these my simple and rude labors seeing the cause is JESVS CHRISTS that KING of Kings and LORD of glory which is here defended even the everlasting truth of GOD against the venimous stings of one of the Locusts Rev. 9.3 of that Antichristian Kingdom The right whereof doth most justly belong to your Majesty both in respect of these rare and singular gifts of knowledge and understanding which the LORD hath vouchsafed upon your Majesty in such a plentiful measure that your subjects do acknowledge it at home and strangers do admire it and commend it abroad Whereby you are not only able to render a reason of that Faith which is in you 1. Pet. 3.15 but also able to stop the mouth of the adversary Tit. 1.9 and convict the gain-sayer whatsoever by that word of truth 2. Tim. 3.5 Wherewith your Majesty hath been brought up from your very infancy So that all the wise men of Babel I mean the Clergy of that Roman Harlot is not able to resist the mouth and wisdom which the Lord hath given to your Majesty And also in respect of that supereminent power as the Apostle calls it Rom. 13.1 whereby as you are most able so are you most obliged to maintain his truth propagat his Kingdom and nowrish his own Spouse which he hath purchased to himself by his own blood Acts 20.28 by the breasts of your Majesties government as it was promised of old That his Spouse should suck the breast of Kings Esa 60.16 So who is more obliged then ye Sir Who so sufficient and able every way to maintain it as ye Sir Your knowledge binds you Your profession binds you Your soveraign authority as ye are a King in Israel binds you For as the wisest King that ever was hath said and left it in writ or rather that King of Kings in him and by him Princes reign by me Prov. 8.15 Ye hold your Kingdom of him Sir and must lay down your Crown at his feet and must stand up and give a reckoning of the government of his Kingdom of the maintenance of his Truth of the nowrishing his Spouse in that day Your knowledge Sir is able to justifie it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your soveraign authority able to defend it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye have received that two-edged sword of Gods Spirit in your mouth able to wound Heb. 4.12 yea to consume that man of sin and son of perdition Ye have received that sword of justice and judgement Rom. 13.4 in your hands able to destroy betimes all the wicked of your Kingdom and to root out from the city of the Lord all the workers of iniquity Psal 101.8 Ye know Sir the abomination of Babel Rev. 17.4.5 that as it is said of the vertuous woman Many women have done vertuously but thou surmounts them all Prov. 31.26 So the contrary may be said of her Many hereticks have taught erroneously and worshipped and wrought abominably but the whoor of Babel Rev. 17.1 the Church of Rome in heresie in abomination in idolatry hath surmounted them all that ever went before her or ever shal come after her Many beasts have spoken blasphemously Rev. 13.1.3.6 but that second beast that hath two horns like the Lamb Rev. 13. 16.13.14 17.3.4.5.6 18.24 surmounteth them all in blasphemy tyranny cruelty and abominable idolatry destroying and making merchandise of the souls of men and women Other heresies did but subvert some fundamental points of Religion but the Church of Rome hath subverted them all almost Of other heresies some was but against the Godhead of Christ other some against his manhood other some against his offices and benefits or some one head or other But the doctrine of the Church of Rome is against them all Injurious to his Godhead in making him not only inferior to the Father in teaching that he is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but also inferior to the very creatures in praying to Mary to cōmand her Son Jure Matris impera Redemptori as I heard your Majesty most solidly prove and so worse then the Arrians Injurious to his manhood to all his offices his benefits and all the means inward and outward of the knowing and applying of him And last of all injurious to his soveraign glory in communicating it to stocks and stones a piece of bread bones and ashes and the skurf skarf of all things as I hope I have made manifest in this my Answer So that most justly it is called The speach of the Dragon and the doctrine of Devils by the Spirit of God Rev. 13.11 1. Tim. 4. And if the profession of such a devilish doctrine be too great an evil what would the practise thereof be I mean the idolatrous Mass that abomination of desolation The misery alace were too great to see the people of this Countrey scattered like sheep without shepherds Matth. 9.36 dying that second and everlasting death for want of the bread of life and Gospel of salvation But this would be the misery of miseries if the golden cup of Babel full of all abominations Rev. 17.4 should be set to their head again to drink the deadly poyson of their own damnation And certainly if this famine of the Word of GOD Amos 8.11.12 whereby not only two or three Cities as the same Prophet saith ch 4.8 but twenty or
INTRODVCTION M. Gilbert Brown An Answer to a certain Libel or Writing sent by M. JOHN WELSCH to a Catholick as an Answer to an objection of the Roman Church c. I received a little scrol which was sent to you by M. John Welsch Minister at Kirkubright in the which there is much promised and little done And because it may appear to some to be something I will God willing answer the same in particular M. John Welsch his Reply AS to your judgement and censure of this my answer to your objection wherein ye think there is much promised and little done I do not regard it For so long as your heart is bewitched with the pleasures of Babel your light is but darkness so while the Lord anoint your eyes with that eye-salve promised in the Revelation 3. and purge your heart by faith ye cannot discern of things different and give upright judgement What I promised I am now by the grace of God ready to perform And whether it was something or nothing much or little that I did let work bear witness and let them that love the truth judge M. Gilbert Brown First he tittles his libel An answer to an objection of the Roman Church whereby they go about to deface the verity of that only true Religion which we profess God forbid that we Catholicks whom he calls the Roman Church seeing that we are the only defenders of the truth as our predecessors the Pastors of the true Church was before us should go about to deface the truth But we go about to impugn all false doctrine repugnant to the truth as the holy Fathers of the primitive Church did before us against the hereticks in their dayes as Ireneus Cyprian Ambrose Augustine Hierome Basile Gregory Chrysostome with the rest of the true Pastors of the Church And seeing that the Ministers of this new Evangel have not only invented some heresies themselves but also have renewed many old condemned heresies confuted by them before as they cannot deny as I shal give some examples afterward as the heresie of Simon Magus of Manicheus Pelagius Aerius Jovinianus Vigilantius with many others what less can we do nor impugn the same as our predecessors did before M. John Welsch his Reply As to your answer First ye deny it and detest it as a blasphemy Next ye go about to clear your selves from the suspicion of it Thirdly ye challenge us and our doctrine with the crimes of novelty and heresie And so ye conclud ye could do no less nor impugn it As to your denying of the defacing of the truth of God so doth the whorish woman Prov. 30.20 after she hath eaten she wipes her mouth and saith she hath not sinned which is true as well in spiritual as in bodily fornication So notwithstanding your Church hath buried the truth of God in the graves of darkness and did overcover it with their traditions and glosses these many years by gone yet you wipe your mouthes and say you have not sinned But look to it in time for ignorance and zeal without knowledge will not excuse you in the day of the Lord. That you detest it as a blasphemy so did the high Priest rent his clothes and said Christ blasphemed Matth. 26.65 when he spake but the truth As for your golden styles which you take to your selves of Catholicks defenders of the truth successors to the Pastors of the true Church and impugners of all false doctrine Your doctrine indeed could not deceive so many if it were not covered with these styles your poyson and abomination would not be drunken so universally if it were not in such a golden cup as this Rev. 17.4 So these are the hyssop wherewith ye would wash you from this iniquity and cleanse you from this sin But may not false Prophets come in sheeps clothing Matth. 7.15 And the ministers of Satan can they not transform themselves as though they were the ministers of Christ 2. Cor. 11.13.14 The Scriptures have fore-told it And did not the false Apostles in Ephesus call themselves the Apostles of Christ and yet they were found lyars And did not the synagogue of Satan call her self the synagogue of the Jews Rev. 2.4.9 that is the Church of God and yet they were not so but the synagogue of the devil Yea and did not Abrahams seed and they that sate in Moses chair and was the successors of Aaron condemn the Savior of the world John 8.37 Matth. 23.2 Therefore not by your styles but by your fruits ye must be tryed Matth. 7.16 For if ye be Catholicks c. ye will teach the doctrine of that good Pastor and chief shepherd the Lord Jesus John 10.14 So it is your doctrine and not your styles that must defend you SECTION II. Whither the Church of Rome is the Catholick Church ANd because Christian Reader by this style of Catholick which they ascrive only to their Church they cause the simple to err and leads many blind-fold to damnation therefore I will take this visard from them Ye are not the Catholick Church as ye style your self and thus I prove it Pope Pius the fifth who wrote a Catechism according to the decree of the Council of Trent Catechism Conc. Trident. in expositione Symb. He there saith That the Church which is called the body of Christ whereof he is the head is called Catholick because it is spread in the light of one faith from the East to the West receiving men of all sorts containing all the faithful which have been from Adam even until this day or shal be hereafter to the end of the world professing the true faith c. Now I reason thus The Catholick Church comprehends all the faithful from Adam till now and that shal be hereafter to the end of the world or else Pope Pius and the Fathers of Trent errs But the Roman Church comprehends not all the faithful from Adam till now and that shal be hereafter Therefore the Roman Church is not the Catholick Church Choose you now which of these ye will deny The proposition I suppose ye will not for then ye should bring two inconveniencies the one upon Pope Pius and the Fathers of Trent that they have erred in defining the Catholick Church and so the Church and the Pope may err The other is upon your self who said that your Church hath not erred And so ye lose your styl of a defender of the Catholick faith for this is a chief point of their faith that the Church cannot err I hope therefore that these are Labyrinths which ye will not wittingly cast your self into and so you must hold fast the proposition All the question is then of the assumption Whither the Roman Church comprehends all the faithful from Adam till now and which shal be to the end of the world or not First I say a particular Church comprehends not all the faithful from Adam c. But the Roman Church is a particular Church or
Acts 2. and Thomas of Aquin 3. part quaest 52. art 1. 3. two great Papists and yet Bonaventure in 3. distinct 22. quaest 4. and Bellarmin lib. 4. de Christo cap. 16. affirms the contrary That his soul was in the place of pain and yet suffered no pain Next Thomas of Aquin affirms 3. part qu. 52. That Christ descended only into that place of hell called Limbus Patrum but Bellarmin saith It is more probable that he went to all the parts of hell And this is the consent which you Papists have among your selves not only in this point but almost in all the points of your doctrine Now as to the places of Scripture which ye quote they serve nothing to this purpose For the 2. of the Acts it speaks of that bondage of the grave which kept him under until he rose again and therefore the Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth death and not hell as ye translate it here and Peter saith whom God raised up The Apostle speaks then of that part of Christ which had fallen and was raised up but it was the body only and not the soul which fell down and was raised up therefore he speaks of the sorrows of death whereby his body was kept in bondage and not of any local descension of Christs soul As for the places of the Psalms which ye quote here Peter brings them not in to prove this local descension as ye say whereof he makes no mention but to prove his resurrection as he saith in the 31. verse most plainly He knowing this before speaking of David spake of the resurrection of Christ that his soul should not remain in grave neither his flesh should see corruption So if ye will believe the Spirit of God in the Apostle interpreting these places they speak of the resurrection of Christ and not of the delivering of the soul out of hell for he was in Paradise as he saith himself and it is the body that was raised and not the soul And the Hebrew word is NEPHESCH which not only signifieth the soul but also the life as Gen. 37.21 Let us smite his soul that is take away his life And it signifieth also the body of the dead wherein there was life as Levit. 21.1.11 And this word Hell is SCHEOL in Hebrew which most usually is taken in the Scripture for the grave So then the meaning is this The Lord will not leave his Nephesch that is the body wherein his life was in Scheol that is in the grave which speech is usual in the Scripture Now as to the other Psalm 29.3 it is spoken properly of David where he thanketh God who had saved his life from the hands of his enemies which by a borrowed speech frequented in the Scripture is called the delivery of his soul from the grave As for the 4. of the Ephesians these lower parts of the earth is not Hell as ye expone it but the earth it self which in respect of the world is the lowest part and so it is taken in the Psalm 139 15. where David saith Thou hast fashioned me beneath in the lower parts of the earth where here it is not taken for Hell as you take it in that place of the Ephesians otherwise ye must say that David was born in Hell which I suppose ye will not say So hereby is meant then the lowest and basest degree of his humiliation So now to conclud this neither in these points M. Gilbert nor in any point of doctrine wherein ye differ from us is your doctrine agreeable to Christs doctrine and his Apostles as hath been I hope proved sufficiently You must therefore provide you for better weapons and armor and stronger defences for the overthrow of our doctrine and uphold of yours then ye have done otherwise your shots will be but as shots of paper and your bulwarks but of intempered morter which suddenly will rush down at the light of the truth of God The Lord open your eyes to see the truth and suffer you not to continue any longer to cause the blind go out of the way as you have done Amen SECTION XX. Concerning the difference betwixt Popery and the Reformed Religion Master John Welsch ANd our Religion which we profess and all the particular heads of it was instituted by Jesus Christ and his Apostles which I offer me also to prove either by word or writ against whosoever will plead the contrary The which if I fail in I will be content to lose my life therefore by his grace Master Gilbert Brown There is much promised here but nothing done and it is a thing impossible to him to do For why the difference chiefly that the Protestants differ from us is in denying abhorring or detesting as may be seen in their Confession of Faith which they compel all men to swear and subscribe As we detest and refuse the usurped authority of that Roman Antichrist upon the Scriptures of God upon the Church the civil Magistrat c. except such things were expresly contained in the Word of God M. John Welsch his Reply As for my promise and performance I answere◠〈◊〉 that before and whither that be a thing unpossible 〈◊〉 or not let this my answer be a tryal thereof You are bold enough indeed in affirming it to be impossible but what have ye for you You say because the difference chiefly that we differ from you is in denying and abhorring What a raison is this Can we not prove our Religion out of the Scripture because we deny yours which is contrary to the same Is it impossible to prove the truth because falshood is denyed and abhorred What new Logick or Divinity is this I would never have believed that ye had been such an unskilful reasoner if your self had not bewrayed the same And certainly your Church is not beholden to you For if your reason hold forth it will follow that it is impossible to you or any man else to prove the heads of your Religion by the Scripture For in your Confession of Faith and form of abjuration set down by the Monks of Burdeaux anno 1585. there they deny and abhor the Protestants and their doctrine and compel all men who desire the fellowship of the Roman Church and their absolution to abjure renounce and subscribe the same But I suppose your Church will not allow this manner of reasoning of yours And whereas you say that the chief difference wherein we differ from you is in denying and abhorring c. of your Religion I ask you Doth not our Religion differ as far from yours as yours doth from us This you cannot deny For are not two contraries equally different one from another Doth not light differ as far from darkness white from black Christ from Antichrist as darkness from light black from white and Antichrist from Christ And are not yours and our Religions contrary one to another But your self will not deny and Bellarmin confesseth in
ye say if they prophesie at any time it is of evil and not of good so said Achab of the Prophet of the Lord 1. Kings 22.8 and therefore he hated him so you speak with the same spirit against us that Achab spake with against the Lords Prophet And what good can be spoken of your Babel since the Lord hath fore-told the ruine of it in part hath been accomplished And some of your own number as Hildegardis Briget Catherine de Sens have fore-told of the destruction of your Church the reformation of the Church of Christ As for the time it was spoken of before and I suppose ye have thought it too long and yet be in patience M. Gilbert for it must continue and your Babel must down As for the clothing of sackcloth it was the apparel of such as was in dolor and in mourning whereby is signified the sorrow and dolor that should arise to the true Ministers of Christ through the persecution of the Antichrist his members their idolatrie and abominations The which hath been so clearly fulfilled in the Preachers of the Gospel since John Hus his dayes and before also even to this day that he must be blinded of the Lord who sees it not And whereas ye cast up the clothing of the Ministry in this land ye have forgotten your self and your Clergy and your Head the Pope with his triple Crown with all the rable of his Prelats Abbots Bishops Cardinals c. as full of riotous pride and pomp as ever were the Persian Kings See Bernard de confid ad Eugen. lib. 4. Platin. de vita Pontif. in Paulo 2. His clothes be made of precious stones his gorgeous Miter dight With jewels rare with glistering gold and with 1 A precious stone called a Carbuncle of the which kind one that fell out of the Popes Miter by a mischance at his coronation was worth 6000. crowns Platin. in vita Clementis 5. Pyropus bright O very Troyan trulls no Troyans The pomp and glory of whose Court doth surmount all the pomp and glory of all the Princes in Europe as some that have seen it reports How then can ye justly quarrel our attire Can you say that we pass the bounds of that modesty and comeliness which the Apostle requires in the over-seers of the Church of Christ seeing you will have all the outward pomp and glory of your Popes and Prelats according as it was prophesied of you Rev. 17. to be comprehended within the definition of comeliness and modestie But you are like the Lamians of whom it is reported that they had but one eye and when they went forth they took it with them to look upon others and when they came in their own houses they laid it beside them You look to your neighbors but ye over-see your self So for all the differences which ye have yet assigned it remains sure that by these two Witnesses here are signified the Ministers of the Gospel Master Gilbert Brown But note here I pray you how well these new Evangelists agree in the exposition of this Revelation of S. John for all their grounds proofs is upon prophesies and dark speakings Young Merchiston in his book upon the Revelation chap. 11. vers 3. expones these Witnesses to be the Old and New Testament as he proves in the 21. Proposition and M. John will have them the Ministers Merchiston saith that to be clad in sackcloth is to preach the Word of God with the obscurity of mens traditions and colored glosses M. John saith here that the sackcloth signifies persecution for the preaching of the Word The notes on their Geneva Bibles printed at London expones the sackcloth to signifie poor and simple apparel And Bale upon the same place writes that this sackcloth signifies sober conversation God knows if this and the like be wholsome doctrine to preach to the poor people some one way and some another according to the invention of their own brains without any proofs Maister John Welsch his Reply As for these diverse expositions which ye mark in us that have so stirred up your affections that ye cry out God knows whether this be wholsome doctrine to teach the poor people or not I answer That these diverse expositions of ours are all agreeable to the analogie of faith as your self will not deny and therefore cannot be called unwholsome doctrine Otherwise not only the Fathers but also your own Doctors and Bishops and Popes have delivered unwholsome doctrine by your reason for they have exponed innumerable places of Scripture diversly which is so manifest that I need not prove it and your self also hath delivered unwholsome doctrine here for ye expone blessing and thanksgiving for two contrary things and yet Bellarmin saith that some Catholicks take them both for one And what shal I say of your diverse expositions which were tolerable so being they were according to the proportion of faith your contradictions one to another and that not only in exponing the Scripture but in the main points of your Religion some holding one thing and some another as partly hath and partly shal be marked are manifold And if diverse expositions of a place of Scripture be unwholsome doctrine as ye say then surely this point of your Catholick doctrine which teaches that the Scripture hath a five-fold sense and that it may be five diverse ways exponed must be unwholsome doctrine and then ye lose more then you can win by this Beware M. Gilbert that by this dealing ye bring not your self in suspicion that ye are forsaking your Catholick Faith For this is a point of it as Bellarmin reports lib. 3. de interpret verb. cap. 3. As for your calumnies first in calling us new Evangelists I answered to that before next in saying that all our proofs and grounds are upon prophesies and dark sayings First you injure the holy Ghost in calling his prophesies dark for the cause of this is not in them but in our blindness Secondly ye speak too plain an untruth for it is more then manifest that not only prophesies but also the plain and simple doctrine of the whole Scripture is the grounds and proofs of our Religion as is manifest by the points of doctrine which we have handled here Master Gilbert Brown And it follows in M. John And at the last saith he they shal be put to death c. Here is two things to be noted First that the Church shal not be invisible in the time of Antichrist for if the Pastors of the Church be invisible how shal they be taken and put to death If the Antichrist and his members shal slay them how can they do the same except they know and may see them To be invisible is not to be known or seen but they will see and know them or else they cannot discern them from their own whereby they may put them to death and save their own The second thing to be noted that
blasphemous reason of yours Martin Luther is the author of our Religion For now your are inforced to grant the contrary that infinit numbers have taught the same doctrine before him The truth is too strong for you M Gilbert that compells you to grant the thing that ye would wish with all your heart the people never knew it But comfort your self M. Gilbert for the truth will be victorious at the last and your darkness dayly more and more will be discovered Indeed the least stroke that ye can give for the defence of your Pope is to call them all hereticks who have spoken against him For I grant the Pope and his Clergy is not such fools as being their own Judges to condemn themselves and to justifie them who not only have taught it but also sufficiently did prove it and many thousands sealed with their blood that he was the Antichrist and his Church Babel But with them they have the Son of God and the Apostles Paul and John hereticks for they also did condemn his idolatry and tyranny and errors But whereabout now will ye contend M. Gilbert Ye say whether their doctrine be heresie or not I would you and your Church would stand upon this and give over all your other contentions while this were first proved Whether their doctrine in so far as they agree with ours and ours in so far as it dissents from yours be heresie or not that is be against the Scripture or not the which if you would do then I hope our contention would soon be ended But for as fast as you run to this now you will flee from it as fast again when we desire to have yours and our doctrine tryed by the Scriptures which of them is heresie and consequently whether ye or we be hereticks And therefore you ever refuse to let your doctrine be tryed by the Scripture but run to your pretended antiquity and successions Councils and lying miracles and many other vain starting-holes like a wild Fox when he is hunted out of one hole he flies to another and dares never abide the fair fields And mark their craft Reader when we affirm that our Religion hath Jesus Christ to be the Author of it in the Scriptures as we offer to prove the same ye refuse this tryal by the Scriptures and say That Martin Luther invented our Religion and we had none that professed it and taught it before him When we again reply That we had sundry of all sorts many hundred years before him even when your Kingdom was at the hight and produces their names they not being able to deny it they slip from that again and say They contend not whether there was such that taught such doctrine or not but they contend whether that was truth or heresie so they run from one starting hole to another But I will ask you M. Gilbert if it be proved that this their doctrine was not heresie will you contend any more then Shal the plea cease then Will you ever slander our Religion of novelty in saying Martin Luther was the first that began it and we had none who professed before him But you will say This you have not proved It is true I had not proved it then but now I hope I have proved it sufficiently that your Popes are the Antichrist and your Rome Babel which was one of the principal heads of the doctrine which ye taught and sundry others also Disprove you it if you can M. Gilbert Master Gilbert Brown But he saith They preached the same Religion that he preaches c. Let M. John name any of these his Doctors that he will abide at in Religion and I shal let him see that he was not of his Religion in all things For that is the thing that we say That albeit M. John and his brethren have renewed many old condemned heresies of hereticks yet they were not of their Religion in all things And therefore this that M. John calls the only truth was never professed in all heads as it is now in Scotland before in no Countrey no not by any one man let be by a number which thing M. Robert Bruce grants himself in his Sermons in these words And God hath chosen a few hearts in this Countrey where he hath begun his dwelling place for God dwells now in the hearts and consciences of his own by his holy Spirit And surely so hath he dwelt with 〈◊〉 these thirty years in such purity that he hath not done the like with any Nation in the earth he hath not remained with any Nation without error and heresie so long as he hath done with us c. So God dwelt in no place without error and heresie the space of thirty years while now in Scotland Master John Welsch his Reply But you say they dissent from us in some things and is not of our Religion in all things Whereunto I answer That suppose this were true yet it will not follow but that they are of our Religion seeing they and we do agree in the main foundations thereof For we have learned to call them brethren which do hold the foundation as the Apostle saith suppose they have built hay straw or timber upon the same Otherwise if ye will be content to be measured with that same measure wherewith ye measure us if you will have none to be accounted of your Religion but these only that profess with you in all things as your Church doth now then not only by your reason shal ye want the Lord Jesus his Apostles the primitive Church as ye do indeed and that not only in the first six hundred years but long after till the thousand year and long after that also to be of your profession because not only the weightiest points of your doctrine have not their original in the Scripture and are unwritten traditions by the testimony of some of your selves but also sundry points of your Religion have been brought in after these dayes being unknown in the former ages as your selves will not deny and I have proved in some heads in the other part concerning the Mass Yea you shal want all the Fathers by this reason of yours For there is not one of them but they have their own errors which ye your selves will not defend and the most part of them are with us against you in many things which you cannot deny and that which is more ye shal want almost all the general Councils except three or four and many of your own Popes Doctors Bishops Cardinals and Jesuits for not only have some of them had errors and some of them been hereticks by your whole confessions but also some of them have been with us in some points against you as I have proved before so that I need not repeat them now As for example Pope Gregory affirms That the books of the Macchabees are Apocrypha Lib. 19. cap. 16. in morali And so have sundry others of your Clergy as
upon this rock But your Popes of Rome are not one singular person but many Therefore your Popes of Rome are not this rock upon the which Christ promised to build his Church What difference is there between your argument for the Pope and this argument against the Pope seeing both are grounded upon the like phrase Choose you then M. Gilbert whether will you have the Antichrist not to be one singular person but a succession of many Or will you have the Popes not to be the rock whereupon the Church is built For the one ye must Thirdly I say the Apostle Paul saith speaking of the Antichrist That the mystery of iniquity is begun even now to work 2. Thess 2.7 And John saith This is the spirit of that Antichrist which ye heard was to come and is even now present in the world 1. John 4.3 And the Apostle saith The Lord shal destroy him with his presence 2. Thess 2.8 And your doctrine is that he shal not come while the end of the world Now what a monstrous man will you make him whose spirit was in the dayes of the Apostles and who must continue till the end of the world if the Scripture be true a man of fifteen hundred years of age already Is this credible Or are you able to perswade men that have but the least drop of reason left in them and believe the Scripture that the Antichrist should be but one singular man since the Scripture saith that his spirit was present in the world and his iniquity even then began to work in the Apostles dayes that is ◠1500. years since and he shal continue to the end of the world Fourthly is it possible that one singular person can perform all these things which either the Scripture or your own doctrine tell he shal do For the Scripture saith He shal resemble the Lamb with horns He shal speak like the Dragon He shal do all the power of the former Beast He shal make all men to worship the beasts image He shal make all both rich and smal c. to receive his mark c. so that no man shal buy or sell but he that hath his mark c. so that all Nations shal be drunken with the wine of her fornication Rev. 13 and 14. and 17. and 18. And your doctrine is that he shal build the Temple of Jerusalem which the Turks have now in possession that he shal destroy Rome that he shal abolish all Religion and all the outward ceremonies thereof that he shal conquer and overcome the strongest Empires in the earth and be Monarch of the whole world Bellarm. lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. and Rhemists annot upon 2. Thess 2. and Sanderus in his demonstrations Now is it likely or can it be that any one mortal man is able to perform so great and so wonderful things Was there ever yet any King Emperor or any other creature under heaven that ever performed so great and wonderful things and specially in so short a time as ye assign to your imaginary Antichrist as of three years and an half That one city of Troy kept all the Grecians for the space of ten years almost besieging it before they could overcome it The Temple of Jerusalem was seven years in building by Solomon who had riches and wealth above all the Kings in the earth who had an hundred fifty three thousand and six hundred workmen for the same 2. Chron. 2. That great Conqueror Alexander with whom no Monarch is comparable neither in power nor happy success was not able to conquer all Asia the space of ten years which was the fourth part of the world And shal we think that a miserable Jew by the help of their scattered people being an enemy to God and all good men shal be able to overcome that great Monarchy of the Turks against whom all the power of Christendom hath not prevailed not only to overcome them but also to overcome all the Empires and Kingdoms in the earth and to restore the city of Jerusalem and build the Temple again from the foundation and abolish all Religion both true and false except his own For this is the doctrine of your Church concerning the Antichrist and that in so short a time as three years and an half as you ascribe unto him Who will believe you M. Gilbert Will any Turk Christian or Jew himself believe that any one man suppose his age were never so long and his person never so strong can be able to accomplish and perform so many and so wonderful things as your own doctrine affirms shal be done by the Antichrist So this doctrine of yours that the Antichrist shal be but one singular person can neither stand with the Scripture nor yet with your own doctrine concerning the Antichrist Fifthly as partly hath been proved this is the common phrase of the Scripture in the person of one to understand a multitude And therefore Daniel in the describing of the Monarchies he compares them to sundry beasts in the singular number to a Lyon a Bear a Leopard c. and yet by them was not signified one certain person but a succession of Kings in the self-same Kingdom and therefore the Antichrist is likened to a beast to signifie a Kingdom and succession of persons in that Kingdom Rev. 13. Tertullian calls the Antichrist A City which prostituts its self to fornication to wit spiritual de resurrectione carnis Ambrose in Apoc. 17 calls the woman clad with purple who is Antichrist the city of the Devil Augustin calls that beast which is the Antichrist the ungodly and body of the wicked who fights against the Lamb a people contrary the people of God which joyntly with their head is called the Antichrist an heretical Church which is called Babylon Nonnulli non ipsum Principem sed universum quodammodo corpus ejus id est ad eum pertinentem hominùm multitudinem simul cum suo Principe hoc loco Antichristum intelligi volunt Homil. 10. in Apoc. homil 13. de civitate Dei lib. 18. cap. 2. lib. 20. cap. 19. Gregory a Pope saith in moralibus lib. 33. cap. 26 The beast is a multitude of them who preach the Antichrist And Thomas a Papist saith The beast which is the Antichrist is a body and so not a singular person And the ordinar Gloss saith The head and the body together make the Antichrist And Hugo a Cardinal calls him an university or commonality So not only the Scripture and reason but also the testimonies of these Fathers and some of your selves concurr all in this that the Antichrist is not a singular person but a body an estat a succession So I hope the Reader hath seen nothing either by Scripture or by reason alledged by M. Gilbert wherefore the Pope may not be the Antichrist Master Gilbert Brown Thirdly S. Paul saith He shal be an adversary and is extolled above all that is called God or that
of Rome he saith They only desire to reign They cannot abide peace They will not cease till they have stamped all under their feet that they may sit in the Temple of God and be lifted up above all that is called God or that is worshipped He who is the servant of servants is the Lord of Lords and desires to be thought of as if he were God And he saith That man whom they use to call Antichrist he speaketh great things as though he were God in whose fore-head that name of blasphemie is written I am God I cannot err Franciscus Petrarcha a light of that age for his manifold learning calls the Court of Rome Babylon and that harlot of Babel that sitteth upon many waters the mother of Idolatry and whoredom the refuge of heresies and errors And Petrus Joannes pronounced the Pope to be the Antichrist and the synagogue of Rome to be that great Babylon And Matthias Parisiensis saith That Antichrist hath seduced all the Universities and Colledges of the learned so that they teach nothing soundly now And the Edict of the Empire under Lodowick the fourth speaking of Pope John the 22. saith Christians cannot keep the peace which is given them of God for this Antichrist meaning the Pope And in another Edict it is written As he is a disaguised Pastor so is he a mystical Antichrist and we declars him being the author of that Antichristian Empire to be damned of heresie and deposed by our right by the Council sentence and common consent of the Princes and Prelats of Germanie the Priests of Italie and people of Rome so desiring And Aventinus in the history of Hildebrand writes That almost all the plain just simple and upright have written that then to wit when he was Pope the Empire of the Antichrist began because they saw that come to pass at that time which our Savior fore-told so many years before And to conclud this Hadrian the 6. Pope in his instructions of his Legats to the Convention at Norimberg he saith Thou shalt say that we grant freely that God hath suffered this persecution to come upon the Church for the sins of men and especially of the Priests and Prelats of the Church And again he saith We know that in this seat speaking of that Pontifical seat in Rome many abominable things have been for some years as abuse in spiritual things excess in commandments and last of all all things changed in worse And the Popes Cardinals speaking to Paul the third say From this fountain holy Father as from the Trojan horse so many abuses have rushed into the Church and so heavy diseases wherewith as we may see she is brought into a disperat estat I omit the rest Ye may see the truth is strong that hath made their own mouthes to fyle themselves To conclud this then He must be the undoubted Antichrist and his Kingdom Antichristian unto whom the whole markes of the Antichrist as he is described in the Scripture by the Apostle Paul and John in the Revelation doth agree But they all agree unto the Popes of Rome and his Kingdom as hath been proved Therefore they must be that undoubted Antichrist who was to come Secondly he must be that undoubted Antichrist whom his own Friers Bishops Cardinals and some of themselves do call Antichrist and ascribe these things unto him that belongs properly to the Antichrist But his own Friers Bishops Cardinals and some of themselves have so testified as hath been proved also Therefore out of their own mouthes they are condemned to be that Antichrist and their Kingdom Antichristian Now to put an end to this my reply That Religion is false which hath neither unity succession nor antiquitie this you cannot deny because you make them the marks of your Church But your Religion hath neither unity for that is broken by your manifold contradictions and dissentions among your selves whereof I have marked some and the diligent Reader of your works may gather many mo Chrachtovius in his book called Bellum Jesuiticum hath gathered of two heads to wit the Mass and Antichrist 205. contradictions let the Christian Reader judge then what may be gathered of the rest no succession neither personal broken by their Popes who was Atheists Schismaticks Hereticks and by a woman Pope neither in doctrine being direct contrary to the doctrine of Christ no antiquitie for the authors and origine of sundry main points of your Religion is set down here and all your Roman Clergy have not satisfied M. Jewels challenge these thirty years ago concerning the novelty of twenty and seven of your opinions Therefore since it hath neither unity succession nor antiquity it is a false Religion by your own doctrine Secondly that Religion which is contrary the Scripture contrary the practise of the primitive Church which opens a door to all licentiousness which can bring no true peace and consolation unto the consciences of men which blusheth to be known and made manifest which maintaineth many great absurdities horrible blasphemies abominable idolatry that is the doctrine of Antichrist and the doctrine of Devils which by their own mouthes is condemned must be erroneous and false But the Religion of the Church of Rome is such as hath been evidently proved before therefore it must be false Wo therefore belongeth to their souls that profess it openly or secretly REVEL 14.8 And there followed another Angel saying Babylon is fallen is fallen that great City because she made all Nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication Vers 9. And the third Angel followed them saying with a loud voyce If any man worship the beast and his image and receive his mark in his fore-head or in his hand Vers 10. The same shal drink of the wine of the wrath of God which is powred out without mixture into the cup of his indignation and he shal be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy Angels and in the presence of the Lamb Vers 11. And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever And they have no rest day nor night who worship the beast and his image and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name FINIS A BRIEF DISCOVERY OF THE BLOODY REBELLIOUS AND TREASONABLE Principles and Practises of Papists Wherein is evidently demonstrated That they teach and commit Treasons and Rebellions against the lives of Princes and peace of Nations and dissolve the obligation of all Oaths and Bonds and making Perjury and Rebellion duties and meritorious works they have been the Authors of Warrs Commotions and Combustions both before and ever since the Reformation in Kingdoms and Common-wealths and have used unparalleled cruelty and unheard-of inhumanity towards Protestants where ever they had the upper-hand And the excuses of H.T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are evidenced to be false and frivolous 2. Tim. 3.1 In the last dayes perillous times shal come For men shal be lovers of their
POPERY ANATOMIZED OR A LEARNED PIOUS AND ELABORAT Treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of Controversie between us and Papists are handled and the truth of our Doctrine clearly proved And the falshood of their Religion and Doctrine anatomized and laid open and most evidently convicted and confuted by Scripture Fathers and also by some of their own Popes Doctors Cardinals and of their own Writers In answer to M. Gilbert Brown Priest By that learned singularly pious and eminently faithful servant of Jesus Christ M. John Welsch Minister of the Gospel first at Kirkubright next at Air in Scotland and last at S. John d'Angely in France The second Edition revised corrected and divided into Sections To which is annexed A Discovery of the bloody rebellious and treasonable principles and practises of Papists in dissolving Oaths committing Treasons raising Warrs and Commotions and using imparalleled cruelties toward Protestants By MATTHEW CRAFORD GLASGOW By ROBERT SANDERS Printer to the City and University 1â—72 In hanc pij docti Auctoris Diatriben pij docti viri M. Matth. Crafordij additamentum decastichon Latino-Scoticum ROmulidum qui sacra oupis cognoscere sacra Et fugere haec sancti perlege scripta viri Perspicuè solidè Babylonia scita refedit Queîs miseras animas turba dolosa capit Quae nunc heu passim nullo prohibente vagatur Pro sapidis dapibus toxica tetra ferens Non minimas CRAFORDI etiam vir docte mereris Grates addideris quòd bona multa libro Vulnera quò capiat meretrix Romana nefandi Propinans stupri pocula plena sui The same in English WHo cursed Rome and Romish rites would know And them eschew this Book will clearly show It Babels doctrine truly doth declare Wherewith poor souls false Papists do ensnare Who now alace run freely as they will For wholsome food with poyson them to kill Great thanks also should learned CRAFORD get For these good things he to the Book hath set Which may help much to give Romes Whoor a wound Whose whoordoms so doth in the Land abound J. A. THE PREFACE TO THE LOVERS OF THE REformed Religion in Britain and Ireland DEARLY BELOVED IN THE LORD The name and memory of that Apostolick and singularly godly and faithful servant of JESUS CHRIST M. John Welsch who now is attending his Masters work in the Upper-House without wearying night and day is so precious in the Church of CHRIST that the revising republishing of any of his works who praise him in the gate will I hope be very acceptable to all the learned and godly especially this subsequent Treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of Controversie betwixt us and Papists are learnedly and solidly debated and the truth of our Doctrine evidently demonstrated and the error superstition and idolatry of the Church of Rome excellently anatomized and solidly refuted especially in such a time as this when Popery so much every where prevaileth and the Pope and his Agents are most active and diligent using all-means to get their deadly wound cured sending over to these Nations dayly swarms of Priests and Jesuits with books beads medals and the like Romish trash thereby to seduce the poor people who are in great hazard partly through their ignorance of the Controversies betwixt us and Papists partly through the lamentable decay of zeal against Antichrist and love to the truth partly through the sad divisions and distractions that are among our selves whereby the poor people are sorely brangled and tempted to Scepteiism and is made use of by Priests and Jesuits as a strong motive to perswade them to Popery although there be far greater divisions among Papists then among us as I have elsewhere demonstrated We shal not detain you long in the entry but only speak a little of the Author and of this Treatise and the causes that moved the reviving and republishing thereof at this time The now triumphing and glorified Author needeth none of our commendation he being among the spirits of just men before the throne and his memory being deservedly very precious in the Church of Christ But because the lives of godly men are useful for imitation we shal give a short description of his life He was descended of an ancient and respective family being a son of an ancient house of the name of Welsch in Nithsdale He was born a little after that blessed work of Reformation began in Scotland and being trained up at Schools he profited very much so that he was excellently accomplished in all kind of literature and eminent for piety and zeal for the Kingdom of Christ And being called to the Ministery of the Gospel about the year 1588. at the town of Kirkubright he was most diligent and laborious in preaching catechising visiting the sick and disputing and convincing of Papists which that Countrey abounded with And his labors were singularly blessed of God for many were brought by his Ministery to see the error superstition and idolatry of Popery and to embrace the truth and many were really converted to God and others were edified and built up confirmed comforted and strenthened so that he as a shining and burning light did inlighten that whole Countrey who at that time was in many places destitut of Pastors After he had remained there several years the General Assembly thought fit to transport him to Air as a Town of greater note and more populous where he was most assiduous and diligent in the work of the Ministery for he preached not only twise on the Lords day but also twise on every day of the week from nine to ten in the morning and from four to five at night where the Lord wonderfully blessed his labors for both in Air and in the Countrey about many were converted by him some of whom were as eminent and lively Christians as readily have been known of latter times After he had continued in the work of the Ministery several years at Air he was commissioned by the Presbytery with some other of his brethren to keep the Assembly indicted at Aberdene anno 1605. for which he with M. John Forbes M. Andrew Duncan M. John Sharp M. Robert Dury and M. Alexander Strachan were arraigned imprisoned and at length banished anno 1606. whereupon he went to France and in a very short time learned the French tongue and acquired such a facility therein as was thought strange by these who knew it He was called to the Ministery in S. John d' Angely a Protestant town in France where his Ministery was much blessed with success But the Civil Warrs arising while he was there that City was besieged on the Protestant interest M. Welsch did much encourage the people and told them that their adversaries should not prevail But in process of time the town was sore straitned and ready to be taken the enemy having raised a battery and by a close approach had made a great breach in the wall M. Welsch hearing
a notable sentence to this purpose It is to be wished saith he where heresie flowrishes that all these who have any gift of writing that they all write suppose they should write not only of the self-same matters or questions but also the self-same things or arguments suppose perchance in other words For saith he it is expedient that Hereticks understand that there are not only one or two but many in the camps of the Catholicks who dare with open face meet them And he saith There is another commodity that comes by the writing of many to wit that by this means the Catholicks books themselves are more shortly and easily brought unto the hands of all men so that while as some fall upon one and some fall upon others yet notwithstanding they are all instructed to use the same weapons in their common dangers The which how fitly it agrees unto this purpose of mine I leave it to the judgement of all men who know the estat of this blinded Countrey wherein that darkness of the Antichristian Kingdom is so far spred the confident brags of the adversary are so universally credited the people scattered as sheep without shepherdâ— Matth. 9.36 lying wide open to all the assaults of the Devil and the deceits of these ravenous wolves and their hands so full of Papistical books the deadly weapons of their own destruction without any one book almost for ought that I know whereby either these that are perverted may be revoked from their errors or these that are assaulted may be sustained from yeelding to the adversary or those that are weak may be confirmed Not unlike the miserable estate wherein the Hebrews were brought unto through the tyranny of the Philistims wanting both sword and spear in the time of their warfare having no smiths in their whole land whereby they were compelled to go to their enemies to sharpen their cowter and sock and other instruments 1. Sam. 13.19.20 22. Now as for the work it self I say nothing of it but only recommend it to the blessing of GOD in all your hearts and consciences The which also hath been my earnest desire to GOD from the first time that I put in hand to the pen continually that his effectual presencâ— might be joyned therewith both to convict the contraâ—â— minded and to confirm the godly Read ye it therefâ—â—â— with that affection of heart wherewith it was written anâ— desire ye that blessing in the reading of it as I did in thâ— writing of it and then I hope through GODS blessing ye shal reap some profit by it Now the GOD of all mercy and the Father of all light illuminat all our eyes more and more and cause the light of his glorious Gospel to shine in our hearts and bless all the means thereof that we may be the children of light here and may be partakers of that everlasting weight of glory hereafter in CHRIST JESUS Amen From Air the 18. December 1602. Yours in the Lord M. Iohn Welsch Preacher of Christs Gospel AN INDEX OF THE SECTIONS of M. Welsch Treatise SEction I. The Introduction page 1. Section II. Whither the Church of Rome be a true Church page 4 Section III. Concerning the infallibility of the Church and her immunity from error page 12 Section IV. Whither the Church of Rome be the only true Church and the Reformed not true Churches page 44 Section V. Concerning the Judge of Controversies namely Whither God speaking in the Scriptures be Judge of Controversies page 71 Section VI. Concerning the necessity of Baptism to Infants page 85 Section VII Whither a man by the help of the grace of God may perfectly keep the Commandments page 93 Section VIII Whither a man by his free-will may resist the will of God page 104 Section IX Concerning transubstantiation and Christs real and substantial body and blood in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper page 106 Section X. Concerning the sacrifice of the Mass page 131 Section XI Concerning the degrees and means whereby the sacrifice of the Mass crap in page 170 Section XII Of the manifold abuses of the Mass page 189 Section XIII Concerning Confession and Absolution by the Priest page 219 Section XIV Of Extreme-unction whither it be a Sacrament page 2â—1 Section XV. Concerning Imposition of hands whither it be a Sacrament page 226 Section XVI Concerning Marriage whither it be a Sacrament page 231 Section XVII Concerning the merit of Good Works page 240 Section XVIII Concerning works of Supererogation page 246 Section XIX Concerning Christs descending into Hell page 253 Section XX. Concerning the difference betwixt Popery and the Reformed Religion page 258 Section XXI Concerning Justification by Faith page 263 Section XXII Concerning the authority of the Fathers page 270 Section XXIII Concerning the visibility of the Church and which â—he visible Church may make defection page 278 Section XXIV Where our Religion was before Luther Or a Catalogue of them who professed our Religion in the midst of Popery page 314 Section XXV That the Reformed Churches have not renewed old condemned Heresies page 328 Section XXVI That the Church of Rome renewed and maintaineth old condemned Heresies page 337 Section XXVII Concerning Antichrist page 343 Section XXVIII That the Pope is Antichrist page 346 An Index of the Sections contained in M. Crafords Treatise SEction I. Showing that the principles of Papists are bloody treasonable and rebellious against the person and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms And the excuses of H. T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are proved to be frivolous page 445 Section II. Showing that no Oath or Bond can oblige a Papist and that they hold it as a principle that no faith is to be kept to Hereticks page 457 Section III. Showing that the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the grand Authors of Warrs and Combustions and Confusions in the Christian world both before and since the Reformation page 465 Section IV. That the continual practise of Papists ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise bloody and treasonable Conspiracies Affassinations and Murders both of Princes and People who profeâ— the Reformed Religion page 474 Section V. Containing some instances in particular of the barbarous and inhumane cruelty of Papists to Protestants where they had the power over them page 490 The Conclusion Holding forth the hazard that the Churches of Britain and Ireland are in of being ruined by Antichrist page 5â—8 A LEARNED PIOUS AND ELABORAT Treatise wherein many of the greatest and weightiest points of Controversie betwixt the Reformed Churches and Papists are solidly debated and the truth of the doctrine of the Reformed Churches especially of the Churches of Scotland evidently demonstrated and the falshood and error of the Popish Religion and doctrine plainly discovered and solidly refuted by Scripture Fathers and also by some of their own Popes Doctors Cardinals and other Popish Writers By way of Reply to one M. Gilbert Brown Priest SECTION I. THE
Apostles till now never interrupted never spoken against but of late since Martin Luthers dayes But yours say they is newlie forged and invented never heard tell of but since Luther and Calvins dayes Therefore yours cannot be the true Religion and ours must be the only true Religion M. Gilbert Brown This objection consists partly of a truth and partly of an untruth It appears by this that either M. John knows not our proofs or if he doth he alters the same that he may the better oppugn his own invention Our objection or rather one of our proofs whereby we prove that we Catholicks is the only true Church of Christ and have the only truth in all things is this We have aboundantly set down to us by the Prophets and Apostles in the holy writ that the kingdom and Church of Christ shal never fail in this earth and that the gates of hell shal not prevail against it But shal be permanent for ever and shal have alwayes the presence and assistance of the Father Son and holy Ghost who shal teach it all truth and remain with it for ever as may be perceived by these places noted here which were over longsome to be set down at length To the which I adjoyn some of the ancient Fathers exponing the same Out of the Old Testament Psal 60.5 read August upon this Psal 88. v. 1.2.3.4.5.19.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.38 read Aug. on these places Psal 104. ver 8. read Aug. Psal 110.9 Esa 9.7 read S. Hier. on Esa 51.7.8 read S. Hier. on Esa 54.8.9 read Hier. on Esa 55.3.13 Esa 59.21 read Hier. on Jer. 31.3.36 read Hier. on Ezec. 37.25.26 Dan. 2.44 Dan. 7.14.27 Mich. 4.7 Out of the New Testament Luc. 1.33 read S. August upon the 109. Psal Matth. 10.18 read here Saint Hierome upon this place Luke 22.32 John 14.16.17 John 17.18.19.20 Matth. 28.20 1. Tim. 3.15 Acts 5.39 Some of the ancient Fathers Hilar. de Trinitat lib. 7. August de utili credent cap. 87. Ambros lib. 9. cap. 20. Chrysost in serm de pente Clem. Alex. lib. 6. strom in the end And because the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers of the primitive Church concurrs and agrees in one unitie I would wish M. John to consider the same that the Church of Christ by all mens judgements shal never fail nor be interrupted nor broken M. John Welsch his Reply I will follow your footsteps and first answer to that part which ye say is true and then unto that which ye say is false And as to the first the ground which ye laid down whereupon ye go about to build the truth of your Religion is the Church of Christ shal never fail nor be interrupted c. It is recorded in Histories Athenaeus dipnosophist lib. 12. of one Thrasilaus a frantick man among the Greeks whensoever he saw any ships arrive at the haven of Athens he thought them all his own and took an inventarie of their wares and met them with great joy Even so it is with you wheresoever you see the name of the Church in the holy Scripture the promises of God made unto the same ye take all to be yours and books the treasures of it and boasts thereof as though they were your own crying The gates of hell shal never prevail against it It shal never fail It hath always the holy Ghost to lead it in all truth To remove you therefore out of the haven and to give every merchant his own ware and his own ship and to set the Church it self in possession of the Church we must distinguish the name of the Church The Church therefore is taken sometimes for the companie of the elect and chosen whereof a part is in heaven triumphing with Christ their Lord a part here in the earth fighting her battels lying in her camp and awaiting for the victorie And these are termed the invisible Church because Gods election cannot be discerned by the judgement of mans senses or eyes and we cannot know who are his chosen And unto this Church that is to the chosen appertains all the promises set down in the Scripture and in them only are they fulfilled And sometimes it is taken for the company of them who professes the true Religion wherein both the chaff and the wheat the popple and the good seed Matth. 3.12 and 13.24.25 the dregs and the wine the good and the evil are mixed together the which suppose they be in the Church yet they are not of the Church no more then the superfluous humors of the bodie are true and livelie members thereof So then if ye mean by the Church The Church of the elect and if ye mean by this That it shal never fail nor be interrupted c. only this that it shal never be utterly abolished but shal have alwayes the presence of the holy Ghost to lead her in all truth yea and in all holiness also in so far as shal serve for her salvation We grant that with you as Bellarmin confesseth of us and therefore he saith Lib. 3. de Eccles milit cap. 13. That many of their number spend but time while as they go about to prove that the Church here beneath absolutelie cannot perish or make absolute defection for Calvin saith he and the rest of the hereticks grant that but they speak and mean saith he of the invisible Church So if ye mean no further but this then Bellarmin telleth you that all the testimonies of Scripture and Fathers that ye have heaped up here to prove the same is but to spend the time so are fetched as needless witnesses in a matter â—â—at is not doubt some or called in question And if ye had understood his language ye needed not to have cumbred your self in fetching of this mortar and stone to build up your Babel For this was not required at your hands But because it is Babel which ye are bigging a tower of confusion therefore the Lord hath sent such a confusion of language among you that few of you understands what another sayes when some cryes for mortar others brings stone Bellarmin the great maister-builder cryes for proofs to prove that the visible Church here beneath cannot err neither in the matters which are needful to salvation neither in the matters which are not needful which she propones to be believed or to be done whither they be doctrine contained in the Scripture or extra scripturam that is not contained in the Scripture He cryes to prove that and ye cumber your self in bringing in a number of Scriptures to prove that the Church shal alwayes remain till the end of the world whereas in the examination of your proofs it will be found that they will go no further with you But if ye mean of the visible Church that it shal never fail c. that is it shal never fail in doctrine nor be interrupted in the same not only in the matters needful to salvation but in all truth as ye affirm of your
abundance of the rivers of the Scriptures of God quench and satisfie this your desire but that you must go unto the unpure fountains of mens writings as though the Scriptures were not sufficient not only to make a man wise unto salvation but to make him perfect in every thing These things I am sure will satisfie the souls of them that love the truth But because you give no credit to the Scriptures but counts them as a nose of wax and as one of your Popes speaking to Bembus a Cardinal called them a fable of Christ and yet such a fable as hath inriched your treasures And Sylvester Prierias writing against Luther saith That the Roman Church and Pope is of greater authority then the Scriptures O horrible blasphemies of the holy truth of God Therefore we will go to the Histories and see what they have testified of these circumstances And although all things here be not expressed to the full yet there is so much left uncorrupted and unscraped out by the gracious providence of God that would not want his witness in all ages out of the Fathers and your own Writers that I hope will satisfie the consciences of all the modest and godly Clemens Alexandrinus saith lib. 1. strom that the Apostles successors received the doctrine from them as the sons from their fathers But he subjoyns That there was very few children that was like their fathers Aegesippus as Nicephorus reports saith lib. 3. cap. 16. That the Church remained a pure virgin as long as the Apostles lived unto Trajans time but they being dead he writes that it was speedily corrupted So if ye credit the testimonies of these men ye see the Church remaineth not long in her integrity And if you would hear any thing of your Roman Church Socrates lib. 7. cap. 11. saith That Celestin your Pope past the bounds of his Priesthood Read Basilius de Spiritu sancto cap. ult and there ye may see what change of Religion was in his time Augustin testifies epist 119. c. 19. That the multitude of ceremonies grew so in his time that the condition of the Jews seemed to be more tollerable then the condition of the Church Now did not this sickness suppose ye grow by time And to come to your own Writers Bernard saith in Cant. 33. That the Ministers of Christ meaning of the Roman Church serves Antichrist And to the Pope himself Eugenius the 3. he saith lib. 4. And thou the shepherd goeth forth being clothed with a glorious attyr if I durst say it these are the feeding places of Devils rather then of sheep Thy court is accustomed rather to receive good men then to make them good not the evil profits but the good decays there And in another place he saith From the sole of the foot speaking of the Church of Rome to the crown of the head there is no health nor soundness And de conv Pauli Psal 91. ser 6. he saith What remains now speaking of the corruption of that Church of Rome but that the man of sin be revealed the man of perdition Daemonium non modò diurnum sed meridianum that is a devilry not only in the day-tyde but in the very noon-tyde And lib. 4. to Eugenius the Pope he saith In these secular attyrs and powers thou hast not succeeded to Peter but to Constantine The day would sooner fail me then the writing of his complaints against the Church of Rome Pope Adrian the 6. in his instructions to his Legats who were sent to the Council of Noremberg he grants and bids them say to the Council That we know that in this chair meaning Peters Sea in Rome for certain years many abominable things have been in it the abuse in spiritual things the excess in commandments and in a word all things are changed in a worse And the Council of the Cardinals to Paul the third they say Out of this fountain holy Father as from the Troyan horse hath broken so many abuses in the Church of God such heavy diseases whereby we see now that she is despaired almost of health Aeneas Sylvius a Cardinal who also was Pope afterward saith of your Church That all faith hath perished in her and love is grown yce-cold And Cornelius Bitontinus Bishop who was present at the Council of Trent saith Would to God speaking of your Church that unanimes velut prorsus c. all with one heart all utterly they had not declined from Religion to superstition from Faith to infidelity from Christ to Antichrist What would ye have more Will ye yet be so shameless as to boast of the purity of your Church and from God to Epicurism ex Epistola 54 ad Caspar Schlick Oratio Cornelii Epis Bitonti 3. Dom. advent I leave the rest as Platin Genebrard Frier Mantuan Nicolaus Clemangis Franciscus Petrarcha Aventinus and a number of others who are full of complaints of the abominations of your Church of Rome that certainly I cānot but wonder at your shamelesness in opening of your mouth and saying That your Church had the truth in all things and never failed nor was interrupted against such a cloud of witnesses whose testimonies ye dare not refuse But I leave you to the Lord. The lips of a liar is abomination to the Lord Prov. 20 So your own mouthes shal rise up in the day of the Lord and condemn you that saith Your Church hath not failed in any substantial point of Religion But you require more distinctly the time place and persons c. that hath brought in this mutation and change If these are to be accounted authors of your erroneous doctrines who were the chief defenders thereof then I say the Popes of Rome for the most part are the authors of the same for they were the chief defenders thereof suppose they had not been the first teachers thereof For otherwise Luther cannot be said to be the author of our Religion as ye say because he was not the first that taught the same and that by your own confession For ye say that sundry other hereticks before Luther taught the same heads of doctrine which he taught and which we profess now as that fasting should be free that only faith justifieth that man hath not free will c. Next because it were too longsome to go through the whole heads of your Religion therefore I will only bring a few examples and that in some of the substantial points thereof As for the sacrifice of the Mass and the ceremonies thereof I have shown the authors thereof in another place therefore I omit that now The first that ever took upon him to exercise jurisdiction over the Churches of the East was Pope Victor anno 200. or 198. who took upon him to excommunicat the Bishops of the East because they would not follow his fashion in the celebration of Easter There the person time and place resisted by Irenaeus Bishop of Lions in France and the Bishops of the East and the brethren
there Polycarpus and sundrie others Euseb lib. 5. cap. 25.26 The first that took upon him the style to be called Universal Bishop was the Bishop of Constantinople anno 581. resisted by Pelagius and after him by Gregorius Bishops of Rome lib. 4. epistola 32.38 39. And yet for all this Boniface the 3. anno 607. obtained this style of Phocas the Emperor the murtherer of his predecessor Platina Sabellicus Marianus Scotus complained of by the Church of Ravenna in Italie and resisted by sundrie as shal be proved afterwards The first that appointed laws of fasting was Montanus the heretick anno 145. Euseb lib. 5. cap. 17. accounted heresie by Apolonius and Augustine against the fasting of the Manicheans The Manicheans were the first we read of that ministred the Communion under one kind as the Papists do now so forth of many other old condemned heresies which your Church hath renewed as shal be proved afterward The first that gave the rise to Transubstantiation was Mark a notable Magician anno 115. who by his inchantment having first caused a cup of white wine to bear the color of blood made his followers believe that by his invocation over it that grace which is above all things had powred his blood into the cup refuted by Epiphanius Haeres 34. and Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 8. The first that decreed Transubstantiation in effect was Pope Nicolaus the 2. anno 1090. in causing Berengarius to recant De consecrat Distinct 2. cap. Ego Berengarius but yet it was not decreed as an universal doctrine before Pope Innocent the 3. his time in a Council of Lateran anno 1215. as Tonstal witnesses de Sacramenta The Greek Church never consented to it Bertramus Berengarius Waldensis withstood it The first that decreed the worshipping of Images was Hadrian in the 2. Council of Nice against the express Scripture after the example of Marcellina an heretick who worshipped the Image of Jesus resisted by sundry Fathers and Councils Concil Eliber Concil Constant Conc. Francof The first that imposed single life and condemned marriage in their Clergy was Pope Syricius anno 290. distinct 82. cap. Proposuisti as the Manichees did before him resisted by sundrie Sigebert H. Mutius Let these examples serve as a taste to the reader How stronglie now ye have manned and fortified your own Church and Religion by your proofs let the reader judge Now let us see how ye disprove ours The question now comes in of the truth of our Church and Religion whither it be from Jesus Christ or not You say it is not from him but from others since his time If ye had gone the straight way to have proved this and to have satisfied the consciences of men you would at the nearest have run to the Scripture and by the same have disproved it But you in stead of this go a far by-way and would father our Religion on flesh and blood dust and ashes in pointing us out Martin Luther to be the father and author of the same as though it had not an ancienter pedegre to reckon unto nor had not the beginning and foundation of it from the root of Jesse the bud of the Lord from whom it hath sprung And for to get your self the better credit you busie your self in marking the circumstances of his preaching as time place matter opposition c. Now that ye are so skilled and acquainted with that history of Martin Luther that you can assign all these circumstances it is no wonder for that was the most notable and remarkable period of the decaying of your Babel and of the erecting up again of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ which your head and Clergy had stamped under foot for so many years which suppose the beginning of it was but like a little leaven and as a grain of mustard seed which of all seeds is the least yet now since it hath so sowred almost the whole mass even the most part of the Kingdoms of Europe which once was under your spiritual bondage and hath grown up into such a high tree having fair and great branches under the which the Lords sheep may get rest and warmness and in the which his souls that mounts upwards to that Kingdom doth build their nests so that neither can all your purgations nor yet all your axes of fire and sword of buls and pardons of preachings and writings stay the spreading of the one nor cut down the branches and root of the other That M. Luther began at that time and in that place and preached against these doctrines we do not deny and that is not controverted But here lyes all the question whither if that doctrine that he preached against was Antichristian or not and whither that Religion which he neither invented nor yet first preached for sundry before him did preach that same doctrine whose names I set down in my answer to your objection but only raised it out of the grave of darkness wherein ye had buried the truth of God Here then I say is the question whither that Religion which he preached hath the warrant from Jesus Christ in his Testament or not The which if ye ever disprove by the written Word of God then shal we grant you all that ye say the which is as impossible to you to do no not suppose your King would call all your wise men and Clergy together as it was to all the wise men of Babel to tell and interpret Nebuchadnezar his dream yea suppose your King would reward you gloriously with honor and riches if ye could do it yet are ye not able to win your wages yea suppose he would tear you in pieces and make your house a jakes unless ye did it as the wise men of Babel was because they could not tell and interpret the Kings dream This is therefore the point which lyes in question betwixt us which ye should have proved if ye could But know ye for a truth that suppose he raised out of the grave the truth of God which ye had buried yet was he neither the inventer nor the first preacher of it but it hath for the beginning and Author of it Jesus Christ the Son of God and the foundation of it in the New Testament of his holy Scripture This for the Author time and place which ye assign Now to the Churches that spake against him I answer They were but such as was made drunken with the wine of your fornication and deluded by your strong delusions being deceived by the golden cup wherein you propined them to be drunken out as it was prophesied of you Rev. 17.4 But the measure of your iniquity being full and the time of the lurking of the truth of God being run out God of his infinit mercy by his ministery and the rest that followed since hath opened the eyes of a great part of these Kingdoms who first said against him to see your Church to be the whore Rev. 17.1 your Kingdom to
only means and instrument whereby the holy Ghost works faith in our hearts Thus I reason therefore He only can be Judge in controversies of Religion whose authority is such that none may appeal from the same whose judgement is infallible true who will not be partial nor favor parties and who is able to convict and perswade the conscience of the truth and make the party to rest in the same But only the holy Ghost in by the Scripture hath these proprieties no other Therefore the holy Ghost in and by the Scripture is only Judge And whereas you say that the holy Writ must bear witn ss to it What will you say then to all the chief points of your Religion almost which the learned and great defenders of your faith before cited have confessed are unwritten traditions which have not their beginning nor authority from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same Upon the which I reason thus That doctrine is not the holie Ghosts which the Scripture bears not witness to this ye say your self for ye say The Scripture must bear witness to it But all the chief points almost of your Religion as the supremacy of the Pope the sacrifice of the Mass invocation of Saints the five bastard Sacraments the worshipping of Images Transubstantiation Communion under one kind Satisfactions Pardons Purgatory Merits of works c. have not their authoritie from the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same as your own Catholicks as ye call them testifies Therefore your Doctrine and Religion is not the holie Ghosts and that by your own testimonie Now trulie M. Gilbert I fear ye lose your style if you defend your Religion no better then this And whereas you say That the holy Ghost gives out his judgement by the Pastors of the true Church I grant indeed that the Pastors gives out publick sentence in controversies of Religion because they are the Lords witnesses messengers and mouthes to testifie proclaim interpret and discern his truth from falshood But first the rule of this their judgement should be the Word of God unto the which they are bound in all their testimonies and judgements from the which if their judgements swerve but an inch-broad they are not the judgements of the holie Ghost so that all their decreets and determinations in the worship of God and man his salvation should onlie be received accordinglie as they agree or dissent from the same For the Apostle pronounces him accursed suppose he were an Angel that would preach another Gospel then that which he preached Gal. 1 8. And he preached nothing but out of the Scripture Acts 26.22 But your Roman Church by the contrary saith That their decreets and sentences should be taken without all tryal and examination because whatsoever they decree say they in manners or doctrine whither they be comprehended in the Scripture or not they cannot err Bellar. de Eccles lib. 1. de Consil cap. 18. lib. 3. c. 14. Next if it be asked of you whom ye judge to be the Pastors of the true Church You will answer as ye do that your Church is the only true Church and your Bishops and Popes the only true Pastors so that they only must be the Judge to end all controversies And Bellarmin is plain in this for he saith lib 3. de verbi interpret cap. 5. 9. lib. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 2. The Pope is chief Judge in all controversies in Religion either he himself alone or with his Council and that in his judgement and sentence all men should rest and he should be obediently heard of all the faithful in all matters of controversie whether he can err or not And their Canon Law hath decreeted That no man should rebuke him suppose he should carry with him innumerable souls to hell And they teach that their decreets should not be examined of any whither they be agreeable to the Scripture or not but that they should be received as the express Word of God and the Gospel Dist 40. cap. Si Papa Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil cap. 18. Rhemist annotat in 2. Thess 2. v. 12. Joannes Maria verractus editus anno 1561. Hosius lib. de express verb. Dei pag. 97. But first judge thou Reader in what suspicion they have their Religion in their own hearts They have declined the holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture and that not only as Judge but in the authentick Greek and Hebrew as witness So their Religion cannot stand if the Lord be either as Judge in his Scripture to give out sentence of it or as witness in the authentick copies to hold his hand at the bar and depone against it Now whom would they have as Judges Their own Pastors and the Pope and all their determinations to be received without a tryal as the Gospel and express Word of God as though their Religion could not be justified unless the Fathers and forgers thereof the Popes and Bishops of Rome were set on the bench to be Judges thereof Now what an unrighteous thing is this both to be partie and Judge For the chief controversie is of themselves whither he be the Antichrist or not And his Ministers and Church Antichristian or not But what show of reason can you have for this The Prince of life the Son of God who is the righteous Judge of the whole world in that great controversie wherein it is called in question whether he was the Messias or not desired not to be the Judge For he said If I testifie of my self much more if I judge of my self my testimony is not true John 3.31 but referred this controversie to the Scripture saying Search the Scriptures c. John 5.32 And yet you that are but flesh and blood dust and ashes yea monsters and incarnat Devils as your own Writers and Councils have testified of some of your Popes who may err and have been hereticks as some of your Popes have been and that by your own testimonies you will not only bear witness of your selves but also be Judges in the controversies of your selves rejecting the judgement of the holy Ghost in the Scripture All men saith the Apostle are liars How then shal I certainlie know but they may lie How shal my conscience rest in their judgement Shal I have no better warrant for my salvation then the testimonies of your Bishops and Popes who are but men and so may lie who are partie and so never will condemn themselves who of all men have most foully erred What is this but to make the voice of your Bishops and Popes of greater authoritie then the voice of God in his Scripture For seeing it is the sense of the Scripture that is called in controversie and the sense of the Scripture is the Scripture it self And your doctrine is that I must embrace such and such interpretations of the Scripture that are called in controversie and my conscience must rest in the same
4. That it is impossible to fulfil the whole Law and Vega a Papist saith lib 11. in consil cap 20 That venial sins are properly against the Law Upon the which I reason He that daylie transgresses the law fulfills not nor is not able to fulfil the law for to fulfill the law and transgress the law are contrarie but your own doctrine is that no man can keep himself at least from venial sins and Vega as hath been said saith that venial sins are against the law Therefore if your selves speak true no man is able to fulfil the law I conclud therefore that this doctrine of yours is contrarie to the doctrine of Jesus Christ and his Apostles set down in the Scripture and also contrarie to the doctrine of the Fathers and contrarie to the doctrine of the most learned and chief Doctors of your Roman Church And this for the second point of your doctrine SECTION VIII Whither a man by his Free-will may resist the will of GOD. Master Gilbert Brown THirdly Our doctrine is that man of his Free-will may resist the will of God which is contrary to their doctrine ratified by Act of Parliament in the year 1560. And also against their Psalm book of Geneva Yet our doctrine is the doctrine of Christ For Christ said to them of Jerusalem How oft would I have gathered together thy children but you would not Matth. 23.37 And S. Steven Ye stiff-necked and of uncircumcised hearts and ears ye alwayes resist the holy Ghost as your fathers your selves also Acts 7 51. The same was the faith and belief of the Apostle S. Peter saith Our Lord is not willing that any perish but that all return to pennance 2. Pet. 3.9 And S. Paul hath Our Savior God wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth 1. Tim. 2.4 This was the doctrine of the Prophets before Psal 5.5 Ezec. 18.23 and 33.11 Now then if God wills that all men should return and yet all men doth not the same whereof proceeds it but of their Free-will which will not work with the will of God Therefore our Savior saith in sundrie places If thou wilt enter into life keep my commands If thou wilt be perfect go and sell all that thou hast Matth. 19.17 He that will follow me let him deny himself Luke 9.23 Master John Welsch his Reply As for this third point of doctrine I cannot wonder enough what ye mean by it For have you sold your self so far to untruth and lying that for to bring the truth of God which we profess in hatred you will father on us that doctrine which never so much as once entred into our thoughts let be to teach it or write it Did you think when you writ this that the truth of it would never come to light Or thought you that ye regarded not to be controlled of lying at the last so being that for a season ye might make our Religion to be more abhorred through your calumnie But frost and falshood as they say will never have a fair hinder end If you mean then by resisting the will of God a voluntary disobedience and repining against the Spirit of God and his revealed will in his Word as the testimonies which ye quote here imports Then I say there was never man of our Religion that professed taught or writ the contrary and ye will not find a syllable neither in the Confession of our Faith confirmed by the Act of Parliament neither in our Psalm book to the contrary For our doctrine is flat contrary to this to wit that man of his Free-will resists that that is good and chooses the contrary So ye fight here with your own shadow And if ye mean any other thing set it down in plain termes and I hope by his grace it shal be answered So I cannot wonder enough what ye mean to write and subscribe so manifest an untruth Now surelie M. Gilbert I think it had been greater wisdom to you to have saved your own credit and not for a little hatred to our Religion to have blotted your self with lying and untruth for ever I would pray thee Christian Reader if thou wilt not credit me read our Confession thy self and I hope thou shalt wonder with me what the man meant in subscribing so manifest a calumnie This for the third point SECTION IX Concerning Transubstantiation and Christs real and substantial Body and Blood in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Master Gilbert Brown Fourthly Our doctrine is that our Savior gave his true flesh and very body and blood under the forms of bread and wine to be eaten of his Disciples at his last Supper and that to be received by their very mouth And this I say by the written Word is the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles Christ saith John 6.51 And the bread which I will give you is my flesh for the life of the world And at the latter Supper Take ye and eat ye this is my body And Drink ye all of this For this is my blood of the New Testament which shal be shed for many unto remission of sins Matth 26.27.28 And in S. Mark This is my body and this is my blood of the New Testament which shal be shed for many Mark 14.22.24 And S Luke saith This is my body which is given for you and this is the calice of the New Testament in my blood which shal be shed for you Luke 22.19.20 This same is the doctrine of the Apostles For S. Paul saith This is my body which shal be delivered for you and this calice is the New Testament in my blood and whosoever shal eat this bread and drink the calice of our Lord unworthily he shal be guilty of the body and blood of our Lord. And after For he that eats and drinks unworthily eats and drinks judgement to himself not decerning the body of our Lord 1. Cor. 11.24.25 27.29 And in the chapter befo e The calice of benediction which we do bless is it not the communication of the blood of Christ And the bread which we break is it not the participation of the body of the Lord 1. Cor. 10.10 M. John Welsch his Reply I come now to the fourth point of your doctrine your Transubstantiation and real presence The first ye quote is the 6. of John And the bread which I will give is my flesh c. This makes nothing for your real presence For first our Savior speaks not here of that sacramental eating and drinking of his flesh and blood in this sermon which was not instituted a year after that For he speaks here of that eating and drinking of his flesh and blood without the which there is no life So our Savior testifies in the 53. verse Except ye eat saith he the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you But your selves grants that men may be saved without that sacramental eating therefore
Sacrament And because in this your abominable sacrifice of the Mass as hath been said there is no communion For the Priest takes all And because you affirm the personal and corporal presence of Christs flesh and blood in your sacrifice and the corporal eating and drinking of it which is Capernaitical and more then carnal contrary to the Scripture contrary the nature of a Sacrament contrary the truth of Christ his humanity and contrary the Articles of our Faith of his ascension sitting at his right hand and there remaining till his returning in the last day all which your sacrifice of the Mass and transubstantiation in your communion overthroweth Therefore you have not the true institution of Jesus Christ according to the Scripture I might end here but because ye account the sacrifice of your Mass most heavenly and the principal part of the worship of God and we account it a most abominable idolatry therefore I will set down some arguments against the same whereby if you will you may perceive the abomination of it First I say all lawful sacrifices have the express testimonies of the Scripture to warrant the institution of them to be of God But your sacrifice of the Mass hath no express testimony of the Scripture whereby it may be made manifest that it is instituted of God therefore it is not lawful What now will you say to this The proposition you cannot deny for our Savior saith In vain worship ye me teaching for doctrine mens commandments Matth. 15.9 And Jeremie reproves the Jewes that they would not walk according as the Lord commanded them but according to their own will Jer. 7 24. And the Apostle condemns all voluntary Religion Col. 2.23 Therefore this is most certain that that Religion or sacrifice which hath not express Scripture whereby it may be made plain that it is instituted of God is not lawful For all that is done without faith is sin Rom. 14.23 and faith hath only the Word of God to lean to Rom. 10.17 And dare the creature be so bold as to appoint a mean to worship God without the warrant of his will in his Word Now to the assumption what can you say to it Bring me an express testimony out of the Scripture that God hath instituted your Mass and take it to you Yea if it be instituted in any place of the Scripture it is instituted in the last Supper for this you grant your selves But there is not a syllable in the whole institution that Christ offered up himself in a sacrifice in the same as hath been proved and Bellarmin the learnedest of your Church confesses plainly that the Evangelists have not said expresly that Christ offered up himself in the Supper in a sacrifice Bellarm. lib. 1. de missa cap. 24. And therefore others of your own Religion Petrus a Soto in his book against Brentius Lindanus lib. 4. Panopliae Papists of great name have reckoned the sacrifice of the Mass among the traditions which have not their beginning nor author in the Scriptures So then by your own confession the sacrifice of the Mass hath not express Scripture to warrant it yea it is a tradition which hath neither the beginning nor author of it in the Scriptures of God And I would ask this question of you What can be the cause wherefore the typical sacrifices and all the rites and ceremonies thereof is so expresly set down in the Scripture of the Old Testament which you will not deny and this sacrifice of yours which ye account more excellent then all these not to have been expresly set down in the New Testament neither the sacrifice nor the rites and ceremonies thereof yea not so much as the very name of it Is the New Testament think ye more obscure then the Old Testament which is absurd to say Shal the Old Testament be clear in setting down the sacrifices and all the rites thereof which is but the shadow And should not the New Testament have been at the least as clear in setting down the sacrifice of the New Testament which ye affirm to be the Mass if it were such What an absurd thing is this Christian Reader assure thy self the Lord Jesus would have dealt as lovingly and plainly with thee in setting down the sacrifice of the Mass in the New Testament if ever he had instituted such a sacrifice as he was in setting down the sacrifices of the Old Testament But thou may assure thy self and thy conscience may lean unto it since he hath not so much as once expressed it in all the New Testament therefore he hath never appointed it Secondly I say in all the places of Scripture wheresoever the Apostles speaks of the sacrifices which Christians should offer up they ever speak of spiritual sacrifices and never speak of this external sacrifice of the Mass They never remember of this their sacrifice of the offering up of Christ in the Mass Look throughout the whole New Testament and thou shalt not find this as namely in these places Rom. 12. Heb. 1â— Phil. 4. Rom. 15.1 Pet. 2. Rev. 5. Are you and your Mass Priests more wise then the Apostles are Whither should we then think and speak as they spake and thought or as ye would have us They never spake of your sacrifice of the Mass and bring one instance if ye can therefore neither should we We will believe them rather then you Thirdly that doctrine which is expresly gain-said by the Scripture must be false This you cannot deny But this your doctrine concerning the often and dayly offering up of Jesus Christ his body and blood in sacrifice in your Mass is expresly gain-said by the Scripture For the Scripture saith in sundry places That he hath once offered up himself never to offer up himself again Heb. 10.10 By the which will we are sanctified even by the offering up of Jesus Christ once made 11. And every Priest standeth dayly ministring and oft times offereth one manner of offering which cannot take away sin 12. But this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sin sitteth for ever at the right hand of God 10. For with one offering hath he consecrated for ever them that are sanctified Heb. 9.24 Christ hath entred into the very heaven to appear now in the sight of God for us not that he should offer himself often c. 28. So Christ was once offered to take away the sins of many Heb. 7.27 Christ died once when he offered up himself Seeing the Scripture therefore affirms so plainly that Christ once offered up himself and you affirm that in your abominable sacrifice he offers up himself often since the Scripture saith the offering up of Christ is once only ye say it is often in your Mass therefore this doctrine of yours is plain against the express sayings of the Scripture For suppose ye will have an unbloody offering up of Christ yet the Scripture only acknowledges this bloody offering up of himself
their own doctrine they make the people to commit idolatry in worshipping of their breaden God About the year 1536. there was four Augustin Friers hanged in Sevil in Spain who had secretly by night murthered their Provincial The day following to avoid all suspicion of the murther they all four said Mass but they had no intention to consecrat as they themselves afterward confessed and so there was no Transubstantiation there by their own doctrine and therefore all these that heard their Mass that day by their own doctrine committed idolatry because there was no consecration there I will set down another example There was a certain Priest who being deposed for his filthy life wherein he had continued for the space of 30. years with a harlot being demanded by one if he had truly repented him of this his abominable life and if he had put away this his concubine from him with intent never to receive her again He never had said he any such purpose Being asked again how then said he Mass every day and made he no scruple to eat the bread of the Lord and drink of his holy cup his conscience accusing him of such an erroneous sin At the last he confessed that to avoid the unworthy receiving of the body and blood of the Lord he did not pronounce the sacramental words wherewith it is consecrat And being urged again how he durst commit so horrible a wickedness as to give so great an occasion of so horrible idolatry to the people who kneeling on their knees casting themselves on the earth lifting up their hands toward the altar striking their breasts did worship the unconsecrated bread and cup Unto whom he answered that it was not so great a fault as he said of it and that he was not alone but many mo did the same which thought it not so abominable an offence as he made of it These two Histories I find written by a Spanish Author one Cyprian Valera the title whereof is Of the Pope and his authority and of the Mass and the holiness thereof All these then that heard the Masses of these men and adored the Sacrament which they lifted up committed idolatry by their own Canons and Decrees For the last did not pronounce the words of consecration and the other four had not the intent to consecrat and therefore there was no transubstantiation there by their own doctrine and so they worshipped bread and wine as their great Redeemer and Creator But what a miserable Religion is this that depends upon the intention of another And therefore who can be certain by their own doctrine whither it be God they worship or not in their Sacrament And this made a certain Inquisitor an enemy to the truth fearing when he heard Mass whither the Priest had intention to consecrat or not to say O Lord if thou be there I adore thee and so by this subtilty he thought to escape committing of idolatry In the time of the Council of Constance there was three Popes that the Council for their abominations did depose and elected another These three not being Popes could not ordain Priests nor give them authority to consecrat so that by their own Canons all they that heard Masses of such Priests as had their authority from them committed idolatry This same may be said of them that heard the Masses of all these Priests that were ordained by Pope Constantin the first and the whore Pope John the 8. For neither of these had power to ordain Priests by their own Canons And as for Pope John there is no controversie of it because she was a woman not capable of that authority by their own Canons And as for Constantin the first he was a laick man who without receiving any orders was by force named Pope He not being a Priest himself could not give this authority to others And so by their own doctrine all these that heard the Masses of such Priests did commit horrible idolatry And howsoever the Pope and his Clergy affirms it to be God and not bread and wine which they adore yet ye shal see what estimation they have themselves of that breaden God of theirs by some examples Pope Gregory the seventh used it for conjuration and sought a response of it and because it would give him none he cast it in the fire and burnt it and so burnt his Creator They use it to revenge their wrongs hatred and malice by it and therefore Pope Victor the third in the year 1088. was poisoned in the calice by his Sub-deacon Such like the Archbishop of York poisoned in the calice Such like Henry the seventh poisoned by a Dominican Frier in the Sacrament They use it for an Harvenger sending it one or mo days journey before with the basest sort of the people The Dominican Friers of the town Auxerra in France in the year 1536. did burn it being vomit out by a Frier that said Mass And the Franciscans de alia Villa burnt the Cow which had eaten up the Sacrament out of the Priests hand and so in burning her did burn their Creator with her Molon one of the Spanish Inquisition 35 years since being to go into procession upon the day of Corpus Christi and the hoste that was to be put in the box being so great that it could not be placed in the same he being impatient to await while another hoste had been consecrat demanded a pair of shears and clipped his God and Creator and so went on forward to their procession Of the which we gather two things First that their Popes and Ecclesiastical rable is without all God and Religion that makes so light of their God as to clip it and burn it and use it as the instruments of their malice and revenge Secondly that this consecrat bread of theirs which they sell to the people to be worshipped and adored is most abominable Idolatry whereof one day they shal give a reckoning to God And thus much for the tenth abuse of their idolatrous Mass The eleventh abuse is that in your cōmunions First contrary the institution of Christ ye give not the bread to the hands of the people to take but puts it in theirs mouthes as though their mouthes were holier then their hands Next ye spoil the poor people of a sweet pledge of their salvation the Sacrament of the wine giving them only bread contrary first the express command of Jesus Christ Drink ye all of this Matth. 26.27 Mark 14.23 next contrary the doctrine of the Fathers August in lib. seu prosp your own Canon Law de consecrat dist 2. can Dumfrangitur hostia Cyprian serm 5 de lapsis and Pope Gelasius de consecrat dist 2. can Comperimus The second is that in your Mass suppose ye speak of a communion and communicants yet there is none at all for your Priest eats and drinks out all And therefore have ye added to the words of Christ eat all drink all contrary the express
he may of right dispense against right that he may make righteousness of unrighteousness and that he may deliver as many souls out of Hell and Purgatory and place them in heaven as pleaseth him Extra de translat Epist Canon Quanto in textu glossa Clement 6. in Bulla he needs no Masses to be said for him Either therefore these sentences that are spoken of him are false or else all Masses said for him are superfluous Eightly if the Mass be one with the Supper then as the Supper was only instituted for the living and not for the dead and therefore our Savior in the Supper commands To take eat drink and to do it in remembrance of him which the dead cannot do so these Masses should not be for the dead And for what dead are these that these Masses are said If they say for them that are in Heaven or Hell I answer the one needs them not and they are unprofitable for the other If they say for them that are in Purgatory I answer this Purgatory is but their own invention to draw water to their own mill and to enrich the Popes treasures for the Scripture makes no mention of it Ninthly their Masses that are said for them that are absent as for the prisoners for them that sail and are in their voyage c. makes it manifest also that the Mass is not one with the Lords Supper for it was instituted not to them that were absent but to them that were present For in the Supper they are commanded to take eat and to drink in remembrance of him which the absent cannot do Indeed it is true that these that are present at the Mass do eat and drink as little as they that are absent the only vantage they have is to be beholders of the Priest eating and drinking all himself alone and of these vain and juglers tricks of the Priest in saying of his Mass which the absent cannot see Tenthly how can their Priests please God in saying Mass for him of whose soul it is doubted seeing it cannot be said with faith and whatsoever is done without faith the Apostle saith is sin Rom. 4.23 And this doubting as James saith cannot stand with faith James 2 6. therefore this Mass of theirs for his soul of whom there is doubt cannot please God But what is all their Religion but conjectures and opinions and doubtings Eleventhly is their Masses for the pest tempest fury fire and all afflictions and maladies as well of man as of beast which containeth intolerable and vile idolatry for every Mass hath his own Saint to be a Patron according to the subject thereof and every Saint hath his own office Against the pest the Priest saith the Mass of S. Sebastian and S. Roch for they are the Patrons and defenders against it after the custom of the Pagans who honored Apollo and Esculapius by feasts and sacrifices for to be saved from the contagion of the same Against the tempest they say the Mass of S. Bernard S. Graith S. Barbe and others in stead of Jupiter which the Pagans worshipped Against the rage or fury they say the Mass of S. Hubert who is the Patron of hunters and dogs as the Goddess Diana was the Patron among the Pagans Against the fire they say the Mass of S. Antony for they make him the Patron of it and they say it is a greater oath to swear upon the arm of S. Antony then when one swears by the Name of God For a woman with child they say the Mass of S. Margaret in stead of Diana and Juno which the Pagans worshipped for women with child For a horse they say the Mass of S. Eloy or S. Antony yea for a poor wifes hen if it be sick or lost And for their pigs they have the Mass of S. Antony Alanus de sacrific Euch. cap. 32. But first what blasphemy is this to have their recourse to Saints hee or shee to obtain of them or by their merit or intercession health in sickness c. and such like things which are only in Gods hands to bestow For it is he only that sends health and sickness fair weather and foul weather and so forth Next the Lords Supper was not instituted to be a charm for such diseases of man or beast or for the fire pest tempest c. but for the remembrance of Christs death So that if there were no more abuse in the Mass but these two things it is sufficient to make all men to abhor such abominable idolatry The twenty and one abuse is their mixing of parcels of the Scripture with their abomination and idolatries in their Mass after the manner of those who go about to impoyson any who mix their poyson with some good food that it may be the less suspected Or rather as the Magiciens and Charmers doth who mixes with their devilish practises parcels of the Scriptures of God and makes those to serve for their devilish purposes which was appointed to Gods honor So are all the places of Scripture which are read and sung in their Mass they are brought forth not for the truth but against the truth for their idolatry and abomination and this they have done that their idolatrie may be less suspected by the simple Next what warrant have they to prefer the Gospel as they call it to the Epistles in standing up at the reading of the Gospel and sitting at the reading of the Epistles seeing they are both inspired of God and they both contain the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the Apostle testifies Rom. 1.1 and 2.16 1. Cor. 4.15 Thirdly the Gospel and Epistles were appointed not to be sung and chanted in the Church as they do but to be read and interpreted for the Psalms and other Hymns in the Scripture are ordained for that use Fourthly seeing the Scripture which is read and sung in your Mass is read and sung in an unknown language as all the rest of your Mass is done to what purpose doth it serve And what is it but a mocking of God and abusing of the poor people The twenty and two abuse is their wax candles which they have burning in the time of their Masses in the fair day light mocking as it were thereby both God the Author of all light and the light of the Sun And to what purpose can they serve to burn in the day light when the Sun is shining but to bear witness against them in the great Day that in the midst of the noon-day they groped in darkness and that they have put out the light of the Gospel that should have shined in their hearts What shal I speak of the rest of your ceremonies which are superstitious idle carnal and Jewish In attire like them for as their Priests were clad in an Ephod a Myter a broidered coat a girdle a breast-plate and a robe Exode 28.4 So with you your Priests must have an Amice an Albe a girdle a fannel whereof some
and so forth And in another place he saith Rom 7.2.3 1. Cor. 7.39 and 7.10.11 To them that be joyned in matrimony I give not command but our Lord that the wife depart not from her husband and if she depart to remain unmarried or to be reconciled to her husband And let not the husband put away his wife Now this is our Religion of matrimony and plain repugnant to the doctrine of the Ministers of Scotland that will licence a man to put away his wife and marry another And they call the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles the Popes cruelty against the innocent divorced in their negative faith Master John Welsch his Reply As for your 8. and 9 points of doctrine concerning Marriage the first that it is undissoluble for no cause the other that it is a Sacrament As to the first I would scarcely have understood this point of your doctrine if your Council of Trent and others of your Clergy who write of it had not been more plain then ye And I think that there are few that knows not this point of your doctrine otherwise who can take it up by this your writing I wonder why ye are so dark in setting down your own doctrine But wherefore should I wonder for darkness may not bide to see the light Your doctrine then is this First you make many causes of separation and divorcement besides adultery Concil Trid sess 24. Can. 8. Bellarm lib. 1. de matrim cap. 14. express against the doctrine of Jesus Christ He that shal demit his wife except for fornication c. he makes her to commit adultery As 1. for the vow of continency to enter in a Monastery or Nunry 2. For heresie 3. And for peril of offending of God Next your doctrine is That suppose there be many causes of separation betwixt the man and the wife from bed and boord as we speak yet the bond of marriage contracted and perfected betwixt the faithful can no ways be broken as long as they both live together no not for adultery So that the party innocent divorced may not lawfully marry another during the life of the guilty party And if they marry they call it adultery and they will have the ground of this to be because it is a Sacrament Bellar. lib. 1. c. 12. So one error follows and leans upon another For if marriage be not a Sacrament then the bond may be loosed by their own doctrine But marriage is not a Sacrament as shal be proved hereafter therefore the bond is soluble Our doctrine is that the bond of marriage contracted and perfected between two Christians is broken by the adultery of either of the parties so that the innocent divorced may lawfully marry another As for our doctrine it is plain in the Scripture in the 19. and 5. of Matthew where there the Lord in plain termes excepts the cause of fornication saying Whosoever demits his wife except it be for fornication and marries another commits adultery So then by the contrary he that demits his wife for fornication which is adultery there and marries another commits not adultery And seeing the Apostle commands 1. Cor 7.2 That every man have his own wife and every wife her own husband and that for the avoiding of fornication and it is better to marry then to burn Therefore the first marriage being dissolved by divorcement justly according to Gods Word it is lawful to the party innocent at least to use the remedy of marriage for the avoiding of fornication Otherwise if he might not use it divorcement were not a benefit but rather a punishment and the innocent should be punished without a fault Now as to the Scriptures which ye quote Matth. 19.6 and 5.31 they have that exception of fornication expresly mentioned And as for the places of Mark 10.11.12 and Luke 16.18 and Romans 7.2.3 and 1. Cor. 7 39. they are all to be understood with that exception of fornication that our Savior expresly sets down in the former two places otherwise Scripture should be contrary to Scripture which is blasphemie to think and our Savior is the best exponer of himself And as for the 1. Corinth 7.10.11 the Apostle speaks not of that separation for adultery but of a separation for a season for other causes or variances in the which case the parties separated are to remain unmarried or to be reconciled together And because ye will not credit us nor the Son of God so expresly speaking in his Scripture yet I think ye will give some credit to your own Doctors Councils Canons and Popes whom if ye be a right Catholick ye think that they cannot err Cajetanus a Cardinal in comment Matth. 19. Ambrosius Catarinus lib. 5. annot in comment Cajetani Papists hold this doctrine with us against the Religion of your Church That adultery breaks the bond of marriage and that the innocent divorced may marry another Pope Zachary Decret causa 32. quaest 7. cap. Concubuisti And the Concil Triburiense ibidem cap. Si quis and another Canon saith That incestuous adultery breaks the bond of marriage so that the party innocent may marrie another Ibid. cap. quaedam And Pope Gregory the third suppose in a Canon he will not have adultery to break the bond of marriage Ibid. cap. Hi vero so that the party innocent may marry another contrary to the doctrine of Christ our Savior yet he permits a man to marrie another if his former wife being taken with some disease be not able to render due benevolence unto her husband Ibid. cap. Quid proposuisti So suppose this Pope will not admit that true cause which our Savior sets down of adultery yet he sets down causes himself which wants the warrant of the Word And Pope Celestin the third set forth a decree that when of married persons one falleth into heresie the party Catholick is free to marry again cap. laudabileÌ„ de convers infidelium confessed by Alphonsus a Papist lib. 1 c. 4. advers haeres So then either your Doctors Canons Councils three Popes err or else the bond of marriage may be broken and the innocent partie divorced may marrie another Your Religion of Matrimonie therefore is not only repugnant to ours and Jesus Christs but also to your own Canons Councils Doctors and Popes Let them therefore condemn your cruel juâ—gement against the innocent divorced And therefore Bellarmin confesses Bellarm. de mat lib. 1. cap. 15. That in this point they have many against them not only us whom he calls hereticks but also Latins Greeks and Catholicks Master Gilbert Brown Ninthly with S. Paul Eph. 5.23 we make it a Sacrament as sundrie of the learned Protestants do as Zuinglius lib. de vera falsa rel cap. de matrimonio Melancthon in locis aeditis 1552. 1558. and chiefly young Merchiston in his 22. Proposition of his discourse upon the Revelation whose words are these Thirdly bodily marriage is by S. Paul called a symbol and a
old heresie in the very time of the Apostles Maister John Welsch his Reply As for this calumny of yours the tryal of it will come in afterward therefore I refer the answer of it to that place And whereas you say that you know not whom I call Fathers either your malice makes you to dissemble your knowledge in this or else palpable must your ignorance be And where you say that Ireneus Cyprian c. and the rest of the holy Fathers are no ways with us against you and that I will not be able to prove it I have not only proved that already in sundry heads of our Religion but also that sundry of your own Popes Cardinals Doctors Bishops Councils and Canon Law have been with us in sundry points of our Religion which we profess against that which ye profess And as for that example of justification by faith only which ye cast in which is one of the chief grounds of our Religion This I will prove both by the Scripture and by the testimonies of the Fathers of the first six hundred years Our doctrine then concerning Justification is this That as our sins was not inherent in Christ but imputed to him 2. Cor. 5 21. which was the cause of his death so his righteousness whereby we are accounted righteous before God is not inherent in us but imputed to us and therefore the Scripture saith that he is made of God unto us righteousness 1. Cor. 1.30 Next the only instrument that apprehends and as it were takes hold of this righteousness of Christ is a lively Faith which works by love and brings forth good fruits so that neither is Faith an efficient or meritorious cause of our salvation for only Christs death and righteousness is that but only an instrument to apprehend the same Neither is every Faith this instrument but only that living Faith which I have spoken of so that true Faith is never without the fruits of good works no more then fire is without heat and yet neither are our works nor the work of Faith it self the meritorious cause of our salvation but only Christs death and righteousness Neither are the fruits of this lively Faith the instrument to apprehend and take hold of Christs righteousness but only Faith it self This then is our doctrine which is so plainly confirmed by the Scripture that he must be exceeding blind that seeth it not The places to confirm the same are these Rom. 3.28 We conclud that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were justified by works then hath he wherein to rejoyce but not with God Ephes 2.9 By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of your selves for it is the gift of God not by works that none should boast And Phil. 3.9 I have counted all things loss that I might win Christ and might be found in him not having my own righteousness which is of the law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God through faith And again Tit. 3.5 Not by the works of righteousness which we had done but according to his mercy he saved us Seeing the Scripture so expresly removes all works both of nature and of grace both going before Faith and following after it and therefore the Apostle saith We are not saved by the works of righteousness which we had done and of all men even of those who were justified already and sanctified as Abraham Paul and the Ephesians were from our justification and salvation as the causes thereof therefore we are only justified and saved by a lively Faith apprehending the righteousness of Christ Secondly the Scripture not only removes works as we have said from the cause of our Justification and salvation but also ascribes it to Faith as in these places John 3.16 Whosoever believeth in him shal have eternal life And Luke 8.48 Thy faith hath saved thee c. And again Ephes 2.9 We are saved through faith And Rom. 4.3.4.5 Man is justified by faith And Rom. 3.26.28.30 God shal justifie circumcision of faith and incircumcision through faith And Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness And lest ye should say the Scripture hath not by Faith only read the 8. of Luke and 50. verse where our Savior saith to Jairus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Only believe and she shal be saved Therefore Faith is the only instrument to lay hold on the promise of God And lest ye should say this was not a justifying Faith I answer This Faith which Jairus had was that same Faith which the woman with the bloody issue had but her Faith not only healed her body but her soul also Luke 8.48 which Bellarmin grants lib. 1. de justif cap. 17. pag. 84. our Savior testifieth saying Thy faith hath saved thee c. therefore this is a justifying Faith also Secondly seeing the Faith of miracles justifying Faith is both one in substance with your Church as Bellarmin c. 5. l. de justif the Rhemists annot in 2. Cor. 12. say if it be a greater work to work miracles as they say then to be justified therefore if only Faith suffice to obtain miracles as Bellarmin grants lib. 1. cap. 20. pag. 97. why should not Faith only be also sufficient to justifie For if it suffice for the greater work much more for the less Thirdly the Scripture ascribes our Justification to grace and not to works and so oppones them that the one cannot stand with the other in the matter of our Justification We are justified saith he freely by grace and not by works Rom. 3.24 And to him that worketh the reward is imputed not according to grace but to debt but to him who worketh not but believeth in him who justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed to him for righteousness Rom. 4.4 And in another place If it be of grace it is no more of works or else were grace no more grace but if it be of works it is no more grace or else work were no more work Rom. 11.6 Seeing therefore our Justification is only of free grace and grace if the Apostle be true cannot stand with works therefore our Justification is not by works or else it were not of grace and so not at all and so the foundation of our salvation were overturned I hope therefore this our doctrine of Justification is plainly warranted by the Scripture Now to the Fathers because ye say it cannot be proved by them they speak as plainly as we do Origen hath these words in epist ad Rom. cap. 3 And the Apostle saith that the justification of faith only sufficeth solius fidei so that he that believeth only is justified suppose no work be fulfilled of him Hilarius Canon 8. in Matth. saith For only faith justifieth fides enim sola justificat Basilius in homil de humil saith This is a perfect rejoicing in God when a man vaunts
world and of the stability and perpetuity of Christs Kingdom But yet it follows not but both the Catholick Church is invisible as I said before and that the visible Churches may be obscured and darkened as it was fore-told in the time of the Antichrist As for the 18. of Matthew 17. Go tell the Church c. The Church is here taken for the Pastors and Governors of particular Churches which we grant are visible but yet it follows not but that both they and the professors may be obscured and darkened either through heresie or through extream persecution or through both together as it was fore-told in the time of the Antichrist and hath been fulfilled by your Church As for the true Church unto whom we should joyn our selves I answer We can have no salvation unless we joyn our selves first to the Catholick Church that is unto Jesus and his members by a spiritual communion without the which there is no salvation Next unto some particular visible Church by the outward communion of the Word and Sacraments c if we know it and possibly can joyn our selves unto it For if either we know it or may not as these seven thousand that bowed not their knee to Baal then I say salvation is not perilled As for your last reason The true Church may never want the true preaching of the Word and right administration of the Sacraments I answer First there is not the like necessity of the Sacraments as there is of the Word Next suppose they have it and thereby are known among themselves and some of them also to their adversaries yet it follows not that they are so openly visible that they are patent and known to all As for example There is no question but these seven thousand that did not bow their knee to Baal 1. Kings 19.18 and these hundred Prophets who was hid in the caves 1. Kings 18.13 and the Apostles when all were scattered through that persecution as Luke testifies Acts 8.1 had the exercise of the Word among them And it is not likely that the Apostles wanted some to teach suppose they were not known to all no not to their persecuters otherwise they would have been persecuted And such like we doubt not but in the time of Queen Maries persecution in England and in other parts under that Antichristian tyranny but the Lord had his own both Pastor and people among whom the truth was preached suppose neither we nor their adversaries knew them all For it is oft-times for the safety of the Church to lurk and to be hid that she may escape the fury and rage of her enemies As for Augustin Cyprian Origen Chrysostome and Jerome which ye quote here they speak either of the perpetuity and eternity of the Catholick Church or else of the largeness and clearness of the particular Churches which were in those days which is neither against the invisibility of the Catholick Church nor yet against the obscure estat and smal handful of the Church of Christ whereunto she should be brought in the days of the Antichrist as was fore-told by the Scripture and fulfilled in your Papistical Kingdom For we grant that in their dayes the Churches of Christ was frequent and glorious but yet they did not ay remain in that estat For the Churches of the East are almost overthrown by the Mahomet and the Churches of the West by the Antichrist So that partly by the one and partly by the other the Church of Christ hath been redacted to a smal handful as hath been said SECTION XXIV Where our Religion was before Luther Or a Catalogue of them who professed our Religion in the midst of Popery Master John Welsch Last of all I will set you down the names of these worthy men that in the midst of Popery spake against their errors and preached the same Religion which we preach I will but only name a few of them that was in the midst of Popery when it was come to the hight anno 1158. Gerardus and Dulcimus Navarrensis M John hath not the right dyet of these his holy Fathers Answer If it was so as you write it it was error in scribendo and that which I writ afterward might have taught you this when I said this was 400. years past did preach earnestly against the Church of Rome and called the Pope the Antichrist and taught also that the Clergy of Rome was become the whore of Babylon fore-spoken in the Revelation this was 400. years past In the year of our Lord 1160. one * This Waldus and his sect had wives and all things common and so must M. John if he follow him Answer This is falsly alledged of him and his followers but either your Canon Law errs Causa 12. qu. 1. Dilectissimis or else Pope Clement was of this mind and so if you be of his Religion you must be so for albeit ye have no wives yet other mens wives have been made common to your Popes and your Clergy in horrible adulteries Waldus a citizen of Lyons in France with a great number taught that same doctrine which we teach now condemned the Mass to be wicked the Pope to be the Antichrist and Rome to be Babylon They were persecuted by the Pope and remained long in Bohemia In the year 1112. the Pope caused an hundred persons in the Countrey of Alsatia whereof many were noble-men to be burnt in one day for the maintaining of that same doctrine that we now maintain against the Church of Rome About the year of our Lord 1230. almost all the Churches of the Grecians which with the rest of the Churches of Asia and Africk who do not acknowledge the supremacy of your Pope are mo then the Churches of Europe who submit themselves to him did all renounce the Pope and the Romish Church because of their execrable simony and idolatry in the year 1240. In the Countrey of Swevia there were many Preachers that taught freely against the Pope and affirmed he and his Clergy were hereticks and simoniacks in the year 1251. or thereabout Arnoldus de Villanova a learned Spaniard taught freely against the Church of Rome and among the rest that the Pope led the people to hell for the which cause the Pope condemned him as an heretick about the same time Gulielmus de Sancto Amore Master and chief Ruler of that University taught that all the testimonies of the Scripture spoken of the Antichrist should be applyed to the Pope and his Clergy and so taught them to be the Antichrist and the whore of Babel anno 1290. Laurence an English-man and Master of the University in Paris proved mightily that the Pope was the Antichrist and his Clergy the Synagogue of Babylon About the same time Robertus Gallus a man of noble parentage taught the Pope was an Idol and said the judgement of God would fall upon him and his Clergy Because I have no time to write the doctrine of the rest
of ryot pride extortion and simony Ammian Marcel lib. 27. Baptist. Mant. Fast lib. 5. Bern. Epist 42. Conc. Basil Sess 21. And as for excommunication he hath used it not against the wicked Bernard ad Eugen. lib. 1. 3. Mantuan sylvar lib. 2. of whom a sink hath flowed at all times in Rome not against thieves of whom Rome is made a den not against murderers for whom there is a sanctuary in the houses of Cardinals at Rome Aeneas Sylvius hist de Asia min. cap. 77. not against adulterers not against whores whereof the Pope received such tribut as hath been spoken but against Emperors Estats Nations who would not serve him at a beck against any man that denyed his Parish Priest a little tiends against whole assemblies of the faithful whom he by most villanous cruelty and treachery as if they had been sheep appointed for the slaughter hath rid away by fire by torment by sword And to end this what shal I speak of his tyrannical laws whereby he hath oppressed the Church of God as of single life auricular confession choise of meats apparel dayes of new and strange canonizing of Saints of pilgrimage to the holy Land of the vows of Monks Nuns of the estates and rites of marriage and of innumerable ceremonies partly unfruitful partly foolish partly impious And what shal I speak of his dispensations against the Old Testament against the Epistles of Paul against all right and equity That a brother may marry his own brothers wife King Henry the 8. and an uncle his sisters daughter Philip King of Spain And Pope Martin the fifth approved the marriage of one with his sister germain That Church offices and livings may be given to boyes to simonical merchants and unlearned persons Bernard Epist 42. de consid ad Eugen. lib. 1. 3. That one may have plurality of Benefices Dist 70. cap. Sacerdotum cap. de mult de praeb That he who hath the Benefice needs not to attend the office cap. relatum de cler cap. licet Canon de elect in Sexto That promise may be broken with God and man That subjects may be discharged of their oath to their Princes Conc. Constant. Sess 19. And last of all what shal I speak of his Indulgences and Pardons in granting so many hundred and thousand years pardon of their sins to them that will devoutly say their idolatrous prayers Some giving three hundred dayes pardon as Pope Celestin Some seven hundred years pardon as Pope Boniface Some ten thousand years pardon as Boniface the 6. Some thirtytwo thousand seven hundred fiftyfive years pardon And Sixtus the 4 hath doubled the time of this fore-said pardon And some ten hundred thousand years pardon for deadly sins as Pope John 22. Portuus book of Sarum printed anno 1520. Here is pardon for all sins so that there be money And as the Revelation saith The very souls of men are made merchandise of Rev. 18.13 And one of their own friends saith venalia Romae Templa Sacerdâ—tes Altaria sacra coronae Ignes thura preces coelum est venale Deúsque Baptist Mantuan calam temp lib. 3. That is Churches Priests Altars crowns fire incense prayers heaven and God are to be sold in the Church of Rome To conclud this then he is the Antichrist whose Doctrine and Religion Ministery and Discipline is directly contrary to the Doctrine Religion Ministery and Discipline of Jesus Christ Again he is the undoubted Antichrist whose doctrine spoyls Jesus Christ of the truth of his humanity of his Prophetical Kingly and Priestly Offices and sets himself and others up in the same offices and whose doctrine spoils him of the glory which is due to him only for our creation and redemption and gives it to creatures and last of all he whose doctrine spoyls men of their salvation must be that undoubted Antichrist But the Doctrine and Religion of the Popes of Rome and his Clergy as hath been proved sufficiently are such Therefore they are that undoubted Antichrist which the Scripture fore-told was to come And this for the second mark The third mark of the Antichrist is That he exalts himself above all that is called God and is worshipped that is above all powers and majesties both heavenly and earthly He saith not Above God himself but above all that is called God that is above all powers heavenly and earthly as hath been said He then is the undoubted Antichrist whom the Scripture fore-told should come who lifts up himself above all powers as well heavenly as earthly this you cannot deny because the Scripture so affirms But the Pope of Rome have lifted up themselves above all powers both heavenly and earthly the which if it shal be proved then of necessity it must follow that the Popes of Rome are that undoubted Antichrist Now for proof hereof we shal set none other upon their assise to file or cleanse them in this point but their own Canon Law their own Writers their own Bishops and themselves Antonius Archbishop of Florence saith Sum. part 3. tit 22. cap. 5. That his power is greater then any created power and that it extends its self to heavenly earthly and infernal things Of whom saith he that is true which is spoken of Christ in the 8. Psalm 6. Thou hast subjected all things under his feet that are in heaven in earth or in hell applying it to the Pope What needs more This is conviction enough But yet we will proceed and see how far he hath lifted up himself above all these As for them in the earth there are two special powers the temporal power and the spiritual power He claims superiority over both as is manifest by their own doctrine The Pope is over the world in stead of Christ Anton in sum part 3. tit 22. cap. 5. I am Cesar all the power in the heaven and in the earth is mine Boniface 8. We affirm and define that it stands all creatures upon the necessity of their salvation to be subject to the Pope Extra de majorit unam sanct The Pope should judge all and be judged of none unless he be found an heretick And suppose he should draw after him innumerable souls by heaps unto Hell yet no mortal man should be so bold as to say to him Lord why dost thou this Dist 40. cap. Si. Papa Gloss extravagant ad Apost How far he hath lifted up himself above the temporal power Kings Princes and Emperors let both their doctrine and practise bear witness The Pope is as the Sun to rule over the day that is the spirituality and the Emperor as the Moon to rule over the night that is the temporality And as the earth is seven times greater then the Moon and the Sun eight times greater then the earth so is the Pope forty seven times greater then the Emperor And as the Emperor or Roman Princes take of me their approbation unction and Imperial Crown so they must not
Rome left off her Gentilism and yet this prophesie is not accomplished in her Unto these I joyn the testimonies of some of their own Monks Bishops Poets Friers Historiographers Emperors and Popes also whereby it will be verified that this harlot is Rome and the Popes thereof the Antichrist Bernard a Monk of Cluniak who lived about 400 years ago writing unto Peter the Abbot of that Monastery speaking of the tyrannous behavior of the Clergy and Bishop of Rome he accuses them of sacrilegious brybery of buying and selling of the Bishops Pall the Ring and of all Laws and equitie And he saith in another place Roma nocens nocet atque viam docet ipsa nocendi Jura relinquere lucra requirere pallia vendi Non Deus est tibi Jesus perfida Roma peristi That is This hurtful Rome doth hurt and teach to be wicked To leave all â—aw and gape for gain and sell a Popish Tippet A greedy gulf a griping grave a filthy jakes Both bottomless unfatiat and all alike she makes By drinking thou art dry and louder thou dost cry come bring me more I pray thee cry ho but thou saith no. I hunger sore I think thou makes gold thy God not Jesus Christ Rome what shal I say What shal I do or tell thee what is done Wealth weakneth thee wealth threatneth thee not to be Rome Then let me speak it and let me write it Rome once thou wast Then let me speak it and let me write it Rome thou art gone And John a Monk saith Curia vult Marcas bursas exhaurit arcas c. That is The Court of Rome doth aim at marks it souks the purse and soaks the arks If that you mind to spare your arks come not at Popes nor Patriarks But if you frankly give them marks and with good gold stuff up their arks I warrant then you shal be free from any kind of penaltie Who is within Who is there I. Why why what would ye Come in Bring you ought No. Stand still But I do Go ye then in The same Monk also saith Roma manus rodit quod rodere non valet odit Dante 's exaudit non dantibus ostia claudit Curia curarum genetrix nutrixque malorum Ignotos notis inhonestos aequat honestis That is Rome is a raket and spiteful hater of the empty hand She heareth the giver but others never but letteth them stand Her Court a cage of cares of mischiefs eke the mother She useth knaves like honest men and strangers like a brother The Archbishop of Golen and Traverse say to Pope Nicolas the first Thou pretends the person of the Pope but thou plays the tyrant We feel a Wolf under the weed of a Pastor The style belies the parent Thou by thy deeds makes show as if thou wert God While as thou art the servant of servants thou contends to be Lord of Lords According to the discipline of our Savior thou art the least of all the Ministers of the Temple of God Thou through the desire of ruling-goeth to perdition Whatsoever thing pleaseth thee is lawful is thee And Gregory a Pope saith I affirm this boldly upon good assurance that whosoever he be that calleth himself or is desirous to be called Universal Priest in that hautiness of his is a fore-runner of Antichrist in that by swelling pride he preferreth himself before others Arnulphus Arelatensis unto the Council of Rhemes testifigs this of the Pope Whom saith he Reverend Fathers think ye this man to be who fitting in an high throne shines in his purple and golden attyre to wit if he want love and be puffed up by knowledge he is the Antichrist fitting in the Temple of God showing himself as though he were God Bernard 400. years ago writing to Eugenius lib. 2 Pope of Rome in conclusion he breaketh forth in these words Thou hust more need saith he to have a rake in thy hand then a scepter to perform the office of a Prophet And in another place in his fourth Book to Eugenius after he hath described and detested the pride of the Bishops of Rome at last he concludeth the matter in these words saying to the Pope Herein saith he thou shows thy self to have succeeded not to Peter but to Constantin Peter is he who never knew what belonged to such solemn showing himself abroad in braveries of precious stones or silks or gold or ryding upon a white palfray or being garded with a troup of tall fellows or environed with a company of ruffling serving men Also in another place in his Epistle 230. speaking of the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome he maketh an exclamation in this sort At the first indeed saith he ye began to play the Lords but over the Clergy contrary to the counsel of Peter 1. Pet. 5.3 And within a while contrary to the advise of Paul Peters fellow Apostle you will have dominion over the faith of all men 2. Cor. 1.24 But ye stay not there ye have taken upon you more namely to have a peremptory power in Religion it self Now what remaineth whereon ye might further incroach except ye will go about to bring the very Angels under your subjection And in another place upon the Cant. serm 33. speaking of the behavior of the Romish Prelats Hence cometh saith he that whoorish tricking that stage-like attire that prince like pomp which dayly we see in them Hence proceeds the gold that they use in their bridles sadles and spurrs insomuch that their spurrs are more glittering then their altars Hence came their stately tables their variety of dishes and quaffing cups Hence issued their jonketting banketting their drunkenness and sursets Hence followed their viols harps and shalms Hence flowed their sellers and pantries so stuffed with wines and viands of all sorts Hence got they their lee-pots and painting boxes And hence had they their purses so well lined with coyn Fy upon it Such men they will needs be and yet they are our great Masters in Israel as Deans Archdeans Bishops and Archbishops These works of theirs are little inferior unto that filthiness which they committed in darkness And lastly he addeth these words For he is the very Antichrist Frederick the second fore-told the ruine of Rome more then three hundred years since in these words writing to Innocentius the fourth Pope Roma diu titubans longis erroribus acta Corruet mundi desinet esse caput That is Rome rowling long about in errors bound and thral Shal fall at last and cease to be the lofty head of all And in his verse written against the Pope he affirms plainly That he was that son of perdition and that head of the wicked fore spoken by Paul And in his letters to the Prelats of the world he calls the Pope That great Dragon that hath deceived the whole world that Antichrist and that counterfeit Vicar of Christ Eberhardus Bishop of Salsburgh above 380 years ago Aventinus lib. 7. speaking of the Bishops
own selves covetous boasters proud blasphemers disobedient to parents unthankful unholy Without natural affection truce-breakers false accusers incontinent c. Traitors heady high-minded c. From such turn away TO THE LOVERS OF THE Reformed Religion in Britain and Ireland Grace mercy and peace DEarly beloved in the Lord The great increase of Popery every where is so visibly seen and so evidently known that to speak any thing to prove and evidence the same were altogether needless seeing he is a great stranger in our Israel that knoweth it not But alace there is very great decay of zeal and hatred against that Whore that if our glorious Predecessors whose excellent Motto it always was No peace with Rome were alive they would wonder to see us so brutish and sensless indifferent and lukewarm in ae matter of so great moment wherein the honor and glory of God the eternal happiness and felicity of our own and our posterities souls and the safety and preservation of Kings Kingdoms our lives estats and all that is near and dear to us is so much and so nearly concerned Therefore for letting us see our hazard in all and every one of these as we have revised and republished the above written excellent Treatise of that learned godly and eminently zealous and faithful servant of Christ M. John Welsch whose memory is very precious in the Church of Christ who doth learnedly and plainly to any ordinary capacity discover the abominations of that Whore and solidly prove her doctrine both to be most heretical and damnable and her self to be the very Antichrist that all who love the truth of God and the salvation of their immortal souls may be stirred up to a just zeal and indignation against her So we have thought fit to subjoyn this following Treatise for discovering to all and every one who love the Reformed Religion and resolve to adhere thereto what treasonable and bloody principles and inhumane and matchlesly cruel practises are maintained and committed by Papists in reference both to Kings Princes and People who profess the Reformed Religion and consequently what all and every one of us may expect to meet with if Popery prevail that so being convinced of our hazard both in body and soul and in all that is near and dear to us we may be stirred up to a real hatred and indignation against that Whore and may be much in the exercise of prayer repentance and other lawful and commanded duties for the putting a stop to the growth of the spreading abominations of that Whore which is earnestly prayed for by Yours for the truth M. C. A BRIEF DISCOVERY OF THE BLOODY REBELlious and treasonable Principles and Practises of Papists SECTION I. Showing that the principles of Papists are treasonable and rebellious against the person and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms c. And the excuses of H. T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies are proved to be frivolous and naught THE Church of Rome was formerly most hateful to the Churches of Christ in Britain and Ireland not only because of her most damnable and heretical doctrine but also because of the rebellious and treasonable principles and practises maintained and committed by her against the persons and authority of Princes and peace of Kingdoms her faith being accounted faction and her Religion rebellion Therefore Papists of late have endeavored by all means to ingratiat themselves in the favor of Princes and Magistrats making ample profession of loyalty and fidelity and charging Protestants with the odious crime of disloyalty And thus we see their late Writers denying and disowning the doctrine of Rebellion and Parricide that our Divines have justly charged them with For H T. the Author of the Manual of Controversies c. printed at Doway 1671 calleth it a loud slander to charge Papists with maintaining that if the Pope excommunicat a Tyrant or heretical Prince his own subjects may lawfully kill him Therefore to unmask a little the bloody rebellious and treasonable principles of Papists we shal prove First that it is no slander but a real truth that the Church of Rome holdeth that if the Pope excōmunicateth a King his own subjects may lawfully kill him 2. That the Pope can dispense with the alleageance of subjects to their Princes and if he so dispense then they are loosed from subjection and alleageance to them 3. That no faith nor oath is to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the Pope and Synagogue of Rome have been the Authors of warrs combustions and confusions in Christian Churches and Kingdoms all Europe over 5. That their continual practise ever since the Reformation hath been to plot and practise treasons and rebellions assassinations and murders both of Princes and people who professed the Reformed Religion 6. That whereever they got the upper-hand and dominion in any Kingdom or Common-wealth they have practised most unheard-of cruelties and barbarous inhumanities against the professors of the Protestant Reformed Religion For the first and second of these points to wit that Papists hold that if the Pope excommunicat a King his own subjects may lawfully kill him And that the Pope can dispense with the alleageance of subjects to their Princes and if he so dispense then they are loosed from subjection and alleageance to them I shal evidence it to be their commonly received doctrine both by the writings of their approved Doctors and Bulls of their Popes and their dayly practises And lest they say we wrong them we shal for the most part set down the words of the Authors themselves 1. I shal begin with Doctor Ranchin a Papist and a famous Lawyer in France in his Book intituled A review of the Council of Trent lib. 2. cap. 10. who setteth down these following positions as commonly received in the Church of Rome to wit That it is necessare to salvation to believe that every creature is subject to the Pope of Rome That he it set over Emperors and Kingdoms That he carryeth both the temporal and spiritual sword That he may depose Emperors c. and transfer their Empires and Dominions from one line to another That he may absolve subjects from their oath of alleageance That upon just cause be may set up a King in every Kingdom for he is the overseer of all Kingdoms in Gods stead That it belongeth to the Pope to correct Kings when they offend Much more hath this Author to this purpose 2. But let us hear their own Doctors themselves Augustinus Triumphus de potest Eccles quaest 46. art 2. as Doctor Usher citeth him saith There is no doubt but that the Pope may depose all Kings when there is a reasonable cause so to do Thomas Aquinas their Angelical Doctor holdeth 22. quast 12 art 2. That so soon as a Prince is denounced excommunicat for Apostasie ipso facto his subjects are free from his soverainity and absolved from the oath of alleageance which they are bound to him Bannes and
that the Jesuit Varadius wrote to Barerius Non posse ab aliquo fieri ullum magis meritorium opus quà m si Regem intersecerit That there could not be a more meritorious work then for him to kill a King Cresuel in his Philopat sect 2. num 160. 162. affirmeth That subjects may not only lawfully dethrone heretical Princes but also are obliged by divine precepts yea even upon the greatest hazard of their souls His words are Obligati sunt subditi ad Principos haereticos depellendos hujusmodi Principes suos non tantum legitimè possunt deturbare sed etiam ad hoc praecepto divino ac vinculo arctissimo ac-extremo animarum periculo tenentur But let us hear what H. T. replyeth First saith he art 7. p. 100. What this or that particular Doctor may hold or the Popes flatterers if he have any adds nothing to the creed of Catholicks nor is it justly chargeable on the whole Church Answer Sir if you had not the whores fore head that refuseth to be ashamed ye could not write so for this is so well known to be the commonly received doctrine of your Church that Cresuel Eudem ingenuously confesseth it For Cresuel plainly avoweth That it is the universal opinion of your Divines and an article of your Faith that any Prince who openly maketh defection from the Roman Catholick Religion and would withdraw others from the same doth presently fall from all his power and dignity by vertue both of Divine and Humane law and that before any sentence of the Pope and their subjects are all free of any obligation of oath to obedience and they ought to cast such a man out of their dominions as an Apostat lest he infect others Now lest ye think we wrong him not citing his words faithfully we shal set down his own words Universa Theologorum Schola tenet est certum ac de fide quemcunque Principem Christianum si de Romano Catholica Religione manifestè deflexerit alios avocare voluerit excidere statim ab omni potestate dignitate ex ipsa vi juris divini ac humani Hocque ante omnem sententiam Pontificis subditos quoscunque liberos esse ab omni juramenti obligatione quod de obedientia praestitissent posséque ac debere hujusmodi hominem tanquam apostatam ex dominatu eficere ne alios inficiat Cresuel Philop. num 37. Likewise Eudem affirmeth Apol. cap. 3. Non est propria Jesuitarum sed totius Ecclesiae quidem ab antiquissimis temporibus consensione recepta nostra doctrina That this is not the peculiar doctrine of the Jesuits but of the whole Church of Rome received from ancient times 2. But if the testimony of these two Doctors be not sufficient I hope the infallible judgement of two Popes è Cathedra will abundantly convince that this is the doctrine of the Romish Church The first is Pope Urban who Can. 23. quast 5. Can. excommunicatorum saith We esteem them not murderers who being possessed with the zeal of their mother the Catholick Church against these that are excommunicat shal happen to kill any of them The second is Pope Sixtus the fifth who when he heard that King Henry the third of France was killed by the Monk he went to his Consistory where before his Cardinals at Rome Sept. 11. 1589 he had a Panegyrick Oration which he began thus Animo meo saepe c. When I pondered in my mind and was intent upon the thoughts of these things which lately have fallen out by God providence I thought I might make use of that of the Prophet Habakkuk There shal be a work done in your dayes which none shal believe when it shal be told The King of France is dead by the hands of a Monk for to that may the words of the Prophet be rightly applyed c. a brave application of Scripture indeed And a little after We with grief truly did often fore-tell that as he was the last of his family so he should have an unusual and shameful end See more of this Oration cited by learned Hornbeck contra Bullam Pap. Innocent 10. Now can any Papist for his heart disown this treasonable doctrine which the Pope approveth except he disown his faith and Religion For doth not the faith and Religion of Papists depend on the Popes decrees so strongly and with such a spirit of delusion that he can make the most pestilent doctrines pass with them for Evangelical truths and the most abominable actions for patterns of holiness For Bellarmin expresly affirmeth and no Papist that I heard of did ever disallow it That if the Pope did err in commanding vices or prohibiting vertues the Church should be obliged to believe that vices are good and vertues evil unless she should speak against conscience Bellarm. lib. 4. de Pontif. cap. 5. And that in good sense Christ hath given to Peter the power to make sin to be no sin and that which is no sin to be sin Bellarm. contra Barclay cap. 31. We can dissent from the most eminent in our Church when they hold any thing contrary to the Word of God but so cannot Papists do with the Pope whom they acknowledge to be infallible 2. But let us hear what H. T. saith further We saith he abominat and detest that doctrine to wit that if the Pope excommunicat an heretical Prince it is lawful for his own subjects to kill him For it is defined by the Council of Constance and therefore of faith with us that it is heretical to affirm it lawâ—ul for a subject to kill his Prince upon any pretence whatsoever Sess 15. Ans O matchless audacity For doth not the Bulls and Dâ—cretals of your Popes the Writings and Disputations of your Doctors and your actings and practises prove you a liar Yea if there were no more then the Acts of the Parliament of Paris who condemned the Books of Bellarmin Suarez Mariana Santarella c. to the fire and banished the Jesuits the Kingdom it were sufficient to convince you of falshood 2. Whereas ye say that the Council of Constance hath declared the doctrine of King-killing heretical it is a mere forgery For your great Doctor Suarez who did write fifteen Volumes of Divinity saith to King James of famous memory that the Council of Constance forbiddeth not the killing of a King excommunicated by the Pope His words are Ubi legit Rex in Concilio Constantiensi particulam illam Principis per Papam excommunicati vel deprivati aut illam per suos subditos aut alios quoscunque The truth is the case propounded to the Council by Gerson was not about the murdering of Soveraign Princes but about the killing of a great Officer of the Crown who ruleth tyrannically and exalts himself above his King For John Duke of Burgundy who had killed Lewis Duke of Orleans pretended him to have been a Tyrant of that kind So then Tyrants are declared inviolable
certainty and warrant of all the doctrine in the Scripture and the Scripture it self that they are of God but the testimony of your Popes and Clergy What is it to expone the certainty of the Lords Scripture and of all Religion comprehended in the same to the mocking and derision of the wicked if this be not Yea is not this to prefer the voice and authoritie of your Popes and Clergie to the voice of God himself For what is the testimonie of your Church but the testimonie of men And is not the Scripture the testimonie and voice of God himself Do ye not therefore lift up the authoritie of your Church that is your Popes and Clergie above the authoritie of God in his Word which as you say that there is no other warrant of the Divinitie of the Scripture but only the testimonie of your Church But God be thanked in Christ Jesus who hath delivered us from this blindness for we have other warrants whereupon the certaintie of our salvation and the Divinitie of the Scripture depends then by the testimonie of the true Church much less the testimonie of your Church which is Antichristian and given over of God to believe lies and so worthy of no credit But how prove ye it Ye say there was no other Church immediatly before Luther but that of yours which was worthy of credit Whereunto I answer first that is false for there was a true Church immediatly before him which ye persecuted as I have proved else where Next I say your argument will not follow there was no other Church immediatly before him c. Ergo we have no other warrant that the Scripture is the written Word of God For we have also the testimony of the Church of the Jews concerning the Old Testament and of the primitive Church in all ages concerning both the Old and New Testament which are not only other warrants then the testimonies of your Roman Church but also worthie of more credit Next I say we have many more principal and more effectual warrants that the Scripture is of God then the testimony of the Church either past or present As first the testimonie of the holy Ghost crying testifying and sealing up in all consciences of the godly not only the truth of the doctrine contained in them but also the Divinitie of the Scripture which Stapleton lib. 1. de authorit script cap. 1.6.7 denyes not and therefore the Scripture saith That the Spirit that is the holy Ghost hears witness that the Spirit that it is the doctrine is truth 1. John 5 6. Secondly the testimony of the Scripture it self warranting and testifying of it self the whole Scripture is inspired of God 2. Tim. 3.16 The Old Testament warranted both by the testimony of its self the histories and prophesies testifying of the books of Moses and also by the testimony of the New Testament both in general 2. Pet. 1.19 Luke 24.44 and 16 29 John 5.39 and also in particular as the books of Moses Matth. 1.5 and 19.7 and 22. John 3.14 and the historical books as the history of the Queen of Saba Matth. 12. and of the widow of Sarepta Luke 4. and of the Psalms in sundry places Acts 2. and 13. and of sundrie of the books of the Old Testament Heb. 11. and Ruth also Matth. 1. and out of Isaiah Ezechiel and Jeremy many testimonies are cited and out of the Books of the smal Prophets Acts 7.42 And such like the New Testament hath the confirmation of it out of the Old Testament For whatsoever thing were prophesied in the Old Testament concerning the Messias are fulfilled in the New Testament so if the Old Testament hath authority the New Testament also hath authority And such like Peter by his testimonie confirmes the Epistles of Paul to be the written Word of God Thirdly the majestie of the doctrine which shines in it the simplicitie puritie and heavenliness of the speach therein which is not to be found in any other writings whatsoever the ancientness and antiquitie of them as the Books of Moses far ancienter then any other writing The accomplishment of the Prophesies and Oracles in them as they were fore-told their miracles and wonders whereof they testifie the testimonies of the holy Martyrs that shed their blood in the defense of the truth of them their wonderful preservation notwithstanding of the rage and cruelty of sundry tyrants who sought them out most diligently to have destroyed them all testifying of the Divinity of the holy Scripture So then to conclud this seeing we have the testimony of Gods Spirit sealing up the truth of them in our hearts and the testimony of the Scripture it self testifying of its self so many manner of wayes and sundry other arguments out of the Scripture it self and the testimony of the Church in all ages all warranting to us the Divinity of the holy Scripture I cannot but wonder at the unsearchable judgement of God in blinding you so far that ye have set it down in writ that we have no other warrant of the holy Scripture but the authority of your Church SECTION VI. Concerning the necessity of Baptism to Infants Master Gilbert Brown ANd albeit here it were not necessary to me to prove any heads of our Religion by the Word of God because M. John hath promised to improve the same by the Word which he is no ways able to perform yet to satisfie the Christian Reader and that he may know that the Word of God is only on our side and with us so that their exposition and notes be taken from the same I will set down God willing some heads for examples cause that that same doctrine which we teach and practise is the same that our Savior and his Apostles preached before and is written in the same that he calls the touchstone Master John Welsch his Reply Howsoever ye say this M. Gilbert that that doctrine which ye teach and practise in your Church is that same which our Savior and his Apostles teached before and is written in the Scripture yet in very truth there is nothing less in your conscience For if you and your Roman Church were so perswaded wherefore then should ye have declined to have it tryed by the same And wherefore have some of your own chief pillars and defenders of your Roman Religion who knows the certaintie of the same wherefore I say would they have proclaimed it by writ unto the world that the most part and the principal heads of their Religion are unwritten traditions which have neither their original beginning nor authoritie in the Scripture nor cannot be defended by the same And wherefore would your Roman Church have heapt up so many false accusations and blasphemies against the same And wherefore last of all would ye have set up your Pope and his Bishops to be supream and soveraign Judge over the same as you do But this you do because you know that if ye rejected the Scripture