THE Catholique Triumph Conteyning A Reply to the pretensed Answere of B. C. a masked Iesuite lately published against the Tryall of the New Religion Wherein is euidently prooued that Poperie and the Doctrine now professed in the Romish Church is the New Religion And that the Fayth which the Church of England now mayntaineth is the ancient Romane Religion Psal. 22. v. 16. Dogges are come about mee and the councell of the wicked layeth siege against me Psal. 120. v. 3. What reward shall be giuen to thee thou false tongue euen mighty and sharpe arrowes with hot burning coales AT LONDON Printed for the companie of Stationers 1610. To the most reuerend Father my very good Lord TOBY the L. Archbyshop of Yorke his Grace Primate of England Fifteene yeares most reuerend Father are now fully expired since I first began to write against the professed aduersaries of the auncient Christian Catholike Apostolique and old Romane religion I meane the late Byshops of Rome the Romish Cardinals the Iesuites Iesuited Papistes and Gunpowder-popish-vassals In which space of time I haue published so many Bookes in defence of the Catholique Fayth as are in number correspondent to the yeares A very long time it was the argument in hand considered before I could any way extort any Answere to any of my Bookes Howbeit when the Iesuites after mature deliberation had seriously pondered with them-selues that through their long silence many Papistes did vtterly renounce Poperie and ioyfully embrace the Catholique Fayth this day sinceerely professed in our Church then they became so ashamed of their silence in that behalfe that in the yeare 1605. they published a litle Pamphlet tearming it The forerunner of Bels downefall wherein they auouched with brasen faces that they had written fiue Bookes fiue yeares afore that time against my Motiues and my Suruey of Poperie And least it should be obiected against them that it cannot be so seeing we can neither see them nor heare of them the Fore-runner telleth vs very grauely but to their endlesse shame that the Answere is suppressed and vpon iust occasion stayed from the publication Alasse alasse how are silly Papistes bewitched with the iugling and deceitfull dealing of these seducers They haue been buzzing about the answering of my two first Bookes as they them selues tell vs almost the space of sixe whole yeares and when after their great paines and labours of so many yeares they had framed the answere in the best manner they could deuise then they suppressed the same vpon iust occasiō as their Forerunner in their name telleth vs. What haue they bestowed fiue yeares in wryting fiue Bookes against two of my Bookes and dare not to this day publish any one of them Out vpon lying lippes Out vpon trayterous Iesuites and Iesuiticall deceyuers of the world The trueth is that there is no trueth in these men And it is an euident testimonie that they are not indeed able to answere for otherwise they would not for very shame haue protested so much in print and haue performed nothing lesse I am verily perswaded that they will neuer during my life which they wish to be short and therefore haue they prouided my Winding sheete and other indirect meanes to take away my life frame any full and direct Answere to the said Bookes because in trueth all the Iesuites in the Christian world are not able to performe it the trueth being so cleare forcible against them After the Fore-runner a pretensed Answere was published in the yeare 1606. against the Downe fall of Poperie For refutation of which silly Pamphlet I addressed my Booke intituled The Iesuites Antepast which seemeth to their daintie mouthes so vntouthsome that I deeme it will serue also for their Post-past as I had formerly published an other Reply intituled The Popes Funerall to the Fore-runner of the Downefall Now lately in the end of the yeare 1608. an other pretensed Answere a silly thing God wote was published against my Booke intituled The Tryall of the new religion This Pamphlet came to my handes in Nouember last at which time I was very ill in body and also distant aboue one hundred Myles from mine owne Librarie the want whereof at that time was farre more grieuous to me then were all my painefull infirmities of body In the midst of which whiles I am writing for the trueth I find no litle comfort The case so standing albeit your Grace was then aboue fourtie Myles from me yet did I presume to bemone my selfe vnto your Grace for the supply of my present want of Bookes with whom my suite found such intertainement as I neither did nor euer could expect Bookes indeed I expected but that your Grace should also send them to me vpon your owne charges most freely and Christianly offering to send me your whole Librarie which is indeed a Librarie most excellent if I shouldst and in need thereof it seemed to mee such an honorable sauour as that I could not now in duetie omit to make this publique acknowledgement thereof The Iesuites and Iesuited Gunpowder Papistes not able to endure the sound of my Tryall wherein Poperie was tearmed and prooued the New Religion haue suborned as it seemeth Robert Parsons that lewd companion and trayterous Fryer to publish that supposed Refutation the summe and substaunce whereof they had no doubt collected and framed to his handes His name he dareth not disclose least the great disgrace which can not but insue vpon that silly Answere should eternally cleaue vnto him as being one who not able to defend Poperie by honest and Christian-like proceeding bestirreth himselfe to effect the same by continuall forgerie by lying by coozenage and deceitfull dealing as in this Booke I shall make apparant Wherein what my selfe haue effected or rather God in mee let the iuditious and honest Reader iudge and for that which he findeth well done giue God the glorie Such as it is I dedicate vnto your Grace as vnto him who hath deserued my vttermost service The Almighty blesse your Grace with many happy yeares in this life and with eternall glory in the life to come Amen Iunij 3. 1609. Your Graces most bounden Thomas Bell. Briefe Instructions for the better vnderstanding of the Discourse following Instruction 1. THE Pope Cardinals Iesuites and all Papistes generally do beare the world in hand that the Church of Rome this day keepeth inuiolably that Fayth and Religion which S. Peter and S. Paul in their time planted there I hold and defende the negatiue proouing the same soundly and euidently throughout this whole Discourse Wee all agree in this that the Church of Rome had once the true auncient Christian catholique and apostolique Fayth which she receiued from S. Peter and S. Paul my selfe most willingly subscribing thereunto I neither impugne the old Romane religion nor reprooue the auncient Byshops there it is the Late vp-start-religion of the Romish Church that now is which I detest and write against in all
and place be correspondent thereunto I prooue it first because Christ himselfe saith That euery Tree which bringeth not foorth Good fruite shal be cut downe and cast into the fire Secondly because Christ sayth in an other place That whosoeuer loue him will keepe his Commaundementes Thirdly because S. Paul telleth vs in one place That God chose vs in Christ before the world was made that we should be holy in his sight And in an other place That we are Gods workmanship created in Christ Jesu vnto good workes which he hath prepared that we may walke in them The 5. Conclusion Good workes are the effectes of Predestination depending vpon it not it vpon them S. Paul prooueth it in these plaine golden and pithy wordes Whom he hath Predestinate them hath he Called and whom he hath Called them hath he Iustified and whom he hath Iustified those hath he also Glorified By this golden Chaine we may euidently perceiue that Glorification Iustification Vocation and consequently Good workes are the effectes of Predestination especially if we ioyne this with the other Conclusions afore going For if it be true as it is most true else th'Apostle should be a lyer that we were elected to be Holy and to doe Good workes it is also true it can not be denyed that Holy life and Good workes are the effectes of our Election and Predestination in Christ Iesus For this cause sayth that famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra in this manner Dicendum quod predestinatio diuina est preparatio gratiae in presenti et gloriae in futuro Et ideo cum sit aeterna sicut ab aeterno predestinauit aliquem ad beatitudinem ita praeordinauit modum quo daret sibi illam beatitudinem I answere sayth this great learned Popish Doctor that Gods Predestination is the preparation of Grace in this world and of Glory in the world to come And therefore seeing it is Eternall as he hath predestinated any one from eternitie to endlesse Blisse or Beatitude so hath he also fore-ordayned the meane by which he would bring him to the same For this cause sayth the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas whose doctrine sundry Popes haue confirmed for Authenticall that Predestination includeth Gods will of bestowing both Grace and Glorie And this Doctor so famous and authenticall addeth these wordes Nam predestinatio est causa et eius quod expectatur in futura vita a predestinatis scz gloriae et eius quod percipitur in presenti scz gratiae For Predestination is the cause both of that which is expected in the life to come that is to say of Glorie and also of that which the predestinate receiue in this life that is to say of Grace For this cause saith our Jesuiticall Cardinall Bellarminus that Good workes follow Predestination as effectes follow their causes These are his expresse wordes Itaque sunt opera bona effectus Predestinationis Therefore Good workes are the effect of Predestination Againe in other place the same Jesuite hath these wordes Itaque illa propositio Deus ab aeterno predestinauit hominibus dare regnum per opera bona praeuisa potest et vera esse et falsa Nam si illud per opera praeuisa referatur ad verbum predestinauit falsa erit Significabit enim Deum predestinasse homines quia opera illorum bona praeuiderat si referatur ad verbum dare vera erit Quia significabit executionem futuram esse per opera bona siue quod est idem glorificationem effectum esse iustificationis et operum bonorum sicut ipsa iustificatio effectus est vocationis et vocatio praedestinationis Therefore that proposition God fore-ordayned from eternitie to giue to men the Kingdome of heauen by their fore-seene Workes may both be true and false For if those wordes by their workes fore-seene be referred to the word Predestinauâ—t hee predestinated or fore-ordayned the sense and meaning is false For it will signifie God to haue Predestinated Men because he fore-saw their Good workes but if the same wordes be referred to the worde Dare to giue and bestow the sense and meaning will be true For it will signifie that the execution must be done by Good works or which is all one that Glorification is the effect of Iustification and Good workes euen as Iustification is the effect of Vocation and Vocation the effect of Predestination Againe in an othor place hee hath these wordes Non ideo pendet praedestinatio ab operibus sed opera a praedestinatione Therefore Predestination doth not depend of Workes but Workes depend of Predestination Againe in an other place he sayth thus Alia ratio est pradestinationis alia executionis Constituit N. in praedestinatione regnum caelorum dare certis hominihus quos absque vlla operum praeuisione dilexit tamen simul constituit vt quo ad executionem via perueniendi ad regnum essent bona opera There is one reason of Predestination an other of Execution For in Predestination God decreed to giue the Kingdome of Heauen to certaine men whom he loued without any fore-sight of Workes howbeit he decreed withall that in respect of the execution Good workes should be the way to come vnto the same For this cause doe our Râ—emistes tell vs that our first Iustification is of Gods Grace and not of our deseruinges because none of all our actions that were before our Iustification could merit or iustly procure the Grace of iustification Thus discourse these famous and great learned Popish Writers to whose Doctrine I subscribe with all my heart For as I haue often sayd else where I highly reuerence the Old Romane religion and to the vttermost of my small talent skill I both haue done doe and will defende the same Yea and iustifie the Doctrine of the Church of England to be the Old Romane Catholike and Apostolike religion which S Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the auncient and first Church of Rome Out of the Doctrine heere deliuered by these famous Papistes Lyranus Aquinas and Bellarminus I gather many excellent Notes First that the Grace Fayth and Good workes which we haue in this world and the Glory which we expect in the world to come doe all wholly proceed from Gods Predestination euen without all desertes of Man Secondly that as God prepared the Kingdome of heauen for his Elect euen before they were borne or had done any Good workes so did he also prepare the way and meanes by which he would bring them to the same Thirdly that no Workes done or fore-seene to be done did mooue God to predestinate any man to the ioyes of Heauen Fourthly that Good workes are not the Cause but the Effect of Predestination Fiftly that Good workes are the way and meanes which God ordayned for the execution of Predestination and for the accomplishment of Glorification Sixtly that not onely Predestination but also Iustification proceedes of
Church while euery one of them sought with might and maine to be the Pope of Rome For the Councell lamenting the Schisme and greatly desiring to stablish vnitie peace in the Church vsed the chiefest and last remedie in that behalfe that is they deposed the three contentious Popes Iohn Gregory and Benedict and chosing Martin made him Pope by their supereminent power And to take away al Schisme dissentions difficulties doubtes suspitions and future garboyles which might perhappes haue insued therevpon the Councell decreed and constantly defined that a generall Councell in causes Ecclesiasticall had the greatest power vpon earth and consequently power and authoritie ouer the Pope euen to cite him to excommunicate him and to depose him And therefore De facto they deposed the three aforenamed Popes and placed Martin in their stead Maister Doctor Gerson a famous and great learned Papist maketh this case so plaine in many places of his workes as none that with iudgement and indifferencie shall peruse the same can stagger or stand in doubt thereof these are his expresse wordes Ecclesia vel generale Concilium eam reprasentans est regula a spiritu sancto directa tradita a Christo vt quilibet cuiuscunque status etiam Papalis existat cam audire ac eidem obedire teneatur alioquin habendus est vt Ethnicus et Publicanus The Church or generall Councell representing it is a rule directed of the holy Ghost and giuen vs of Christ that euery one of what state soeuer euen Papall must heare and obey the same or else be reputed as an Ethnicke and Publican Againe in another place the same Doctor hath these words Iohannes Papa non est accusatus vel conuictus de Heretica prauitate et tamen concilium vocauit et iudicauit ipsum tanquaÌ„ suuÌ„ subditum vnde et in toto processu vsque post sententiam definitiuam suae depositionis reputatus est ab eodem concilio verus Papa Pope John was neither accused nor conuicted of Heresie and for all that the Councell both called and iudged him as their Subiect Wherevpon the Councell reputed him the true Pope in all the time of their proceeding against him vntill after the definitiue sentence of his Deposition In an other place the same Learned Writer hath these wordes In causis fidei non habetur in terra Index infallibilis vel qui non sit deuiabilis a fide de lege communi praeter ipsum Ecclesiam vniuersalem vel ConciliuÌ„ generale eam sufficienter repraesentans In matters of Fayth there is no infallible Iudge vpon earth or which can not swarue from the Fayth by the common course of Gods proceedinge sauing the Church vniuersall or a generall Councell representing the same sufficiently In an other place he hath these wordes Ecclesia vel generale Concilium potuit et potest congregari sine expresso consensu vel mandato Papae etiam ritè electi et viuentis in multis câ—sibus The Church or a generall Councell both might and may be called togeather without the expresse consent or mandate of the Pope euen when the Pope is lawfully elected liuing Thus disputeth this famous Papist and great learned Doctor Out of whose wordes I gather many very excellent documentes well worthy to be written in Golden letters First that the Pope is subiect to a generall Councell and may be controlled by the same Secondly that the Pope may erre both priuately and publiquely in resolutions of Fayth aswell as other Byshopps and Ministers of the Church Thirdly that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope and hath power to depose the Pope for any notorious Crime whatsoeuer Fourthly that the contrary opinion is flatte Heresie condemned in the Councell of Constance Fiftly that a generall Councell hath full power to compell a Pope lawfully elected to renounce and forsake the Popedome and to giue place to him whom the Councell shall appoynt and choose Sixtly that if the Pope shall withstand the Councell and refuse to obey the Decrees and Constitutions thereof he ought and must be excommunicated and reputed as an Ethnicke and Publican Seuenthly that a generall Councell may be summoned and kept without the consent of the Pope euen of that Pope who is both lawfully chosen and at time liuing Eightly that all people are subiect to a lawfull generall Councell euen by Christes owne rule and designement Ninthly that neither the Pope nor any one man vpon earth is or can be an infallible Iudge in matters of Fayth Tenthly that the iudgement which we must finally rest vpon in all controuersies of Fayth and Religion is either the iudgement of the vniuersall Church or else of a generall Councell sufficiently representing the same This is found and very Catholike doctrine though proceeding from the Penne of a great Papist Which Doctrine as the Councell of Constience first and after it the Councell of Basill did approoue by their flat decrees so doe I reuerently embrace the same with all my heart humbly thanking God that by the mighty power of his trueth our aduersaries are compelled to confesse the trueth against them-selues This Doctrine is confirmed more at large both in my Anatomie and in my Golden Ballance to say nothing of my Christian Dialogue which woundeth the Pope at the very heart From hence proceedeth that which will seeme to many a woonderment of the world But what is that will some say This forsooth that all Papistes this day liuing are flat Heretiques Is it so in deede Is that possible to be prooued It is so possible that I haue euen now prooued the same most euidently And thus the most simple Reader in the world shall easily perceiue the same The generall Councell of Constance decreed plainely that the Popes Iudgement is fallible that the Pope is subiect to a generall Synode and by the authoritie thereof may be depriued of the Popedome as also that the contrary opinion is flatte Heresie This is alreadie prooued Now so it is that all Papistes this day liuing vpon earth doe hold the Popes Iudgement to be infallible and himselfe to be aboue a generall Councell So say the Rhemistes so sayth our Iesuite euen in the end of his Chapter next afore-going being the 29. in number Ergo seeing all Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes doe this day hold and defende that opinion which a generall Councell hath defined to be flatte Heresie it followeth by a most necessarie consequence and ineuitable illation that they all are flat Heretiques it can not be denyed Deo gratias dixi B. C. And before we prooued how Pope Leo irritated and made of no force a Decree enacted in the Councell of Chalcedon which argueth his Superioritie ouer the Councell T. B. I answere first that this assertion and opinion of our Fryer is a flatte Heresie as it is euen now prooued and that most euidently Secondly that this sottish allegation is confuted againe and againe in the
our Fryers liking viz. that the name Pope was giuen to other Byshops in the auncient Church as I haue prooued in my Tryall euen hundreds of yeares after the Primitiue Church To which addition this to cheere vp our Fryer is consectarie to weet that the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergie of Carthage called S. Cyprian the most blessed Pope Which verily as is already sayd they neither would nor yet durst haue done if the name in such a peculiar manner as the Fryer would make vs beleeue had been due to the Byshop of Rome For if the sayd name had been peculiar to him and his supposed soueraignetie implied therein other Byshops could neuer haue enioyed the same in the puritie of the Church Nay other Byshops would neuer haue improperly accepted of that name and title which none but the Byshop of Rome could properly ascribe vnto himselfe B. C. With the former he hath coupled an other saying thus And so in processe of time the Byshoppes of Rome were solely and onely called Popes and of Late yeares our Holy Father and his Holynesse is his vsuall name A grosse vntrueth T. B. This assertion hath two partes The former our Fryer hath freely graunted in his immediately aforegoing words The latter he must likewise yeeld vnto against his will or else be condemned of the whole world For besides that the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine and the popish Byshop Iosephus Angles in their Books of Late yeares dedicated to the Byshoppes of Rome haue giuen them the title of Holinesse euen in the abstract it is so euident that his Holinesse is of Late yeares the vsuall name of the Byshop of Rome that if any man either in Rome or in Jâ—ahe shall deny the same he may iustly be censured worthy of the Whetstone That which he sayth of Theodoretus the Councell of Chalcedon S. Cyprian and S. Austin is very friuolous and nothing to the purpose For first I say of Late yeares and yet the youngest of our Fryer named lyued aboue a thousand yeares agoe Secondly there is great disparitie betweene a peculiar and an vsuall name A peculiar name perteineth solely and onely vnto one but that an vsuall name may agree to many at once it cannot be denyed Thirdly as our Fryer hath confessed that the name Pope was of old time giuen to many and yet afterward remayned to the Byshop of Rome alone so must he volens nolens confesse of the name Holynesse B. C. Prosecuting his former matter he sayth But this Emperour that is Iustinian lyued after Christ his birth about 528. yeares ergo this poynt of poperie is a rotten ragge of the New religion In which wordes he venteth out an vntrueth For be it that it was then appropriated to the Pope as he sayth yet how can it be New which by his owne confession was vsed xi hundred yeares agoe That is so many ages before the foundations of his Religion were laide or the name of a Protestant heard of in the whole world T. B. Our Iesuite desiring to discharge the Pope and Poperie of Newnesse would prooue it by my graunt viz. because I confesse the name Pope to haue been appropriated to the Byshops of Rome a thousand yeares agoe But our Fryer in thus disputing doth prooue him selfe a very Daw. For he must learne to know that the newnesse of a thing may be considered two wayes absolutely and respectiuely And consequently that though the name Pope be Old absolutely considered yet it is New respectiuely when it is compared with the time of the Apostles Now so it is that you Papistes beare the world in hand that your Poperie is the Old religion and that selfe-same Doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Church of Rome This is the Doctrine which I oppugne euen in the beginning of this present Chapter But our Fryer is so besotted with malice that he cannot discerne the trueth my reason standeth thus You Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes affirme desperatly and damnably that your Late start-vp Poperie is the Old religion deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paul to the Church of Rome But that is so farre from being true that the very name Pope is New as wanting aboue 500. yeares of that age or time whereof you bragge and boast ergo seeing the Apostolicke and first Religion is onely the Old religion and that which commeth after as Tertullian truly writeth the false and New religion it followeth of necessitie that the name Pope comming 500. yeares after the Old religion is but a rotten Ragge of the New Where I wish the Reader to remember that I speake of the name Pope in that sense in which the Byshoppes of Rome vsurpe the same That which our Jesuite addeth of Protestantes how absurd it is shall God willing by and by appeare B. C. I omit heere how many Ecclesiasticall names haue been brought into the Church as Consubstantiall against the Arrians Incarnation against other Heretikes the better by a new name to declare an auncient article of Fayth Will Bell for all that call these Wordes rotten Ragges of a New religion Hee never dare offer it and yet with no lesse reason may be doe it then he doth heere the name of the Pope T. B. Who seeth not to what shiftes our Iesuiticall Fryer is driuen He affirmeth desperately that I may with no lesse reason call the holy names appropriated to the sonne of God rotten ragges of a New religion then the name of the Pope But out vpon such Rotten diuinitie out vpon such paltry Fryers The sacred names Consubstantiall and Incarnation are equiualently according to the substance and true nature of the thinges signified by the same set downe in many places of the holy Scriptures Which was made most apparant against the Arrians by the Fathers of the first famous Councell of Nice but the name Pope as it is of Late yeares challenged by the Byshops of Rome and heere auouched by the impudent Fryer is so farre from being either expressely or virtually conteyned in the holy Scriptures that all sacred Writ vtterly condemneth the same as a Rotten ragge of a New religion inuented at Rome aboue fiue hundred yeares after the death of S. Peter S. Paul Againe the Holy names of Consubstantiall and Incarnation were not first common to others and afterward attributed to the sonne of God But the name Pope as I haue prooued and as the Frier hath plainely confessed was first and that more then 500-yeares common to all Byshops and in processe of time appropriated to the Byshops of Rome Thirdly the thing truly signified by the holy wordes Consubstantiall and Incarnation neuer could agree to any creature in the world but the thing truely signified by the word Pope did in the primatiue and purest age of the Church doth at this present and may in time to come truely agree to all true Byshops in Christs Church Now touching the name of Protestant I answere
Byshoppe which hee was bold to present to the Popes Holynesse where it found kind acceptation and therefore is and must be authenticall though it giue our Holy Father a deadly blow Out of which learned Discourse I obserue these worthy Lessons First that euery Veniall sinne is against right reason Secondly that euery Veniall sinne is the transgression of some Law Thirdly that to doe any thing against right reason is to doe against the law of Nature Fourthly that the law of Nature commaundeth not to decline from the rule of right reason Fiftly that the temporall rule with which the goodnesse of our actions is measured is the right reason of our vnderstanding which is giuen to euery one in his creation birth or natiuitie Sixtly that the eternal rule with which the goodnesse of our actions ought to be measured is the Will of God Seuenthly that therefore our thoughtes wordes and workes are against right reason because they are against the Will of God which is the law Eternall Which Obseruations if they be duely pondered doe euidently prooue and plainely conuince that euery Sinne is Mortall of it owne nature Fiftly because euery one is accursed which keepeth not euery iote of the Law Sixtly because Christes blessed Apostle S. Iames telleth vs plainely That whosoeuer shall keepe the whole Law and but offende in any one precept is guiltie of all Seuenthly because God will destroy all manner of Liers and all workers of Iniquitie Odisti omnes qui operantur iniquitatem perdes omnes qui loquuntur Mendacium Thou hatest all workers of Iniquitie thou wilt destroy euery one that is a Lyer Thus saith the holy Prophet of God in the spirit and person of God Out of which wordes I obserue two poyntes of great consequence First that where all are comprised there not one among all is excepted and consequently the sacred Text is to be vnderstood euen of euery least Sinner and of euery least Lyer Secondly that where Destruction is for Punishment inflicted there Gods Law doubtles is transgressed and so is euery Popish Veniall sinne against the Law Eightly because Christ himselfe teacheth vs That besides the Law against the Law is all one in rei veritate in the trueth of the matter Qui non est mecum contramâ— est et qui non congregat mecuÌ„ spargit He saith our Maister Christ that is not with mee is against mee and hee that gathereth not with mee scattereth Ninthly because Durandus a famous and learned Popish Writer confuteth the fondly inuented distinction of their Popish Canonized Saint Aquinas which the Pope and his Jesuites hold for the maintenaunce of late start-vp Poperie to weete that Veniall sinnes are praeter Legem non contra Besides the Law but not against the Law These are the expresse wordes of Durandus Ad argumentum dicendum quod omne peccatum est contra Legem Dei naturalem vel inspiratam vel ab eis deriuatam To the Argument answere must be made that euery Sinne is against the Law of God either naturall or inspired or deriued from them And this opinion of M. Durand is this day commonly defended in the Schooles So doth Fryer Ioseph tell our holy Father the Pope these are his wordes D. Thomas et eius sectatores tenent peccatum Veniale non tem esse contra Legem quaÌ„ praeter Legem Sequitur Durandus tamen et alij permulti hanc sententiaÌ„ impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata Et haec opinio modo in scholis videtur coÌ„munion S. Thomas and his followers hold that a Veniall sinne is not so much against the Law as besides the Law But Durand and very many others impugne this opinion auouching Veniall sinnes to be against the commaundementes And this opinion seemeth now adayes to be more common in the Schooles Heere I wish the reader to note by the way out of the word modo now adayes the mutabilitie of late start-vp Romish religion as also the dissentioÌ„ of popish Schoole-doctors in the misteries of their fayth and Doctrine For in that their Byshoppe the Fryer sayth modo now adayes he giueth vs to vnderstand that their Romish Doctrine is now otherwise then it was of old time and in former ages And in that he telleth vs of the great dissension amongest their Doctors he very emphatically layeth open to the Reader the vncertainty of Romish fayth and Religion For doubtlesse if their tyrannicall Inquisition and the dayly feare of Fire and Faggot were taken out of the way the Popes ridiculous and plaine Heathenish Excommunications with his Decrees and Definitions in matters of Fayth would be of small account and troden vnder foote This is a most worthy Note and must be well remembred For the Old Romane religion was Catholique pure and found and with it doe not I contend I onely impugne the late start-vp Romish Fayth and Doctrine which the Pope and his Romish Schoolemen haue brought into the Church Tenthly because Vega a great Learned Papist very famous in the Church of Rome doth not onely teach euery Veniall sinne to be against the Law but withall he constantly affirmeth that therefore none lyuing can possibly keepe the whole Law at once For albeit hee hold that euery part of the Law may be kept at some time yet doth he constantly denie that the whole 〈◊〉 kept at once because one partiâ—â—â—â—â— broken with Popish Venials against the Law while an other is kept The third Conclusion Albeit euery Sinne be Mortall of it owne nature yet are not all sinnes equall and alike but one greater then an other I prooue it first because our Lord Iesus doth distinguish the degrees of Sinnes while he affirmeth him that is angrie with his brother to be guiltie of Iudgement him that sayth to his brother Raca to be guiltie of a Councell him that calleth his brother Foole to be guiltie of Hel-fire Secondly because the holy Ghospell telleth vs that the Sinnes of the Sodomites and of the Gomorrhaeans shal be punished more remissely in the day of Iudgement then the sinnes of those Citizens who would not receiue the Apostles nor hearken to their preaching Thirdly because Tyrus and Sidon shall be more remissely dealt withall in iudgement then Corozain and Bethsaida The case is cleare I need not stand about it For euery Child can tell vs that it is a greater Mortall sinne to steale a goodly Gelding or a great fatte Oxe then it is to steale a fatte Calfe or a fatte Hogge Yea a greater sinne to kill a Man then to eate an Egge in Lent though Popish inflicted punishment doth not euer so insinuate But hereof more at large when I come to speake of Popish Lent The fourth Conclusion Veniall sinnes of their owne nature are against Charitie and doe breake friendshippe and amitie with God I prooue this Conclusion against the Pope his Iesuites and all Jesuiâ—ed Popelinges whether in England
litle children the consonant sound reboundeth as it were an eccho with the surges of the Sea Iustinus Martyr hath these wordes Sub haec consurgimus communiter omnes et praecationes profundimus et sicuti retulimus praecibus peractis panis offertur et vinum et aqua Et praepositus itidem quantum pro virili sua potest praeces et gratiarum actiones fundit et populus faustè acclamat dicens Amen These thinges being done wee all arise togeather and make our Prayers and after our Prayers the Bread is offered with Wine and Water and the Minister as he is able prayeth and giueth thankes and the people with ioyfull acclamation say Amen Philo a very auncient and learned Writer awong the Iewes sheweth this old practise of our Christian Church in these wordes Quae omnia supra dictus vir eo ordine eademque consequentia qua apud nos geruntur expressit Et vt vnus ex omnibus consurgens in medio Psalmū honestis modulis concinat vtque praecinenti ei vnum versiculum omnis multitudo respondeat All which the aforenamed man he speaketh of Philo the Jew related in the same order and consequence in which our selues doe them And that one among all rising vp in the middest sing a Psalme with tunable voyce and that so soone as he hath sung one Verse all the people answere him S. Chrysostome speaketh so plainely of the peoples praying togeather with the Priest that euē in the time of the Liturgis or Masse as none doubtlesse that either read or heare his wordes can stand any longer in doubt thereof These are his expresse wordes In eisdem iterum horrendis mysterijs bene precatur Sacerdos populo et bene precatur populus Sacerdoti Nam cum spiritu tuo nihil aliud est quam hoc Ea quae sunt Eucharistiae id est gratiarum actionis communiae sunt omnia neque ille solus gratias agit sed etiam omnis populus prius N. accepta illorum voce deinde congregatis illis vt dignè et iustè hoc faciat incipit Eucharistiā Et quid miraris si populus cum Sacerdote loquitur In these dreadfull mysteries the Priest wisheth well to the people and the people desire Gods mercie to the Priest For these wordes with thy spirit haue no other meaning The thinges that pertaine to the Eucharist that is to the giuing of thankes are common to them all for he onely giueth not thankes but all the people also with him For he first receiueth their voyce after that they being gathered togeather that he may doe this reuerently and well he beginneth the Communion And what maruell is it to thee if the people pray with the Priest S. Cyprian testifieth the same practise to haue been vsuall in his time alleadging the very wordes that the common people answered to the Priest Thus doth he write in expresse tearmes Ideo et Sacerdos ante orationem praefatione praemissa parat fratrum mentes dicendo sursum corda vt dum respondet plebs habemus ad Dominum admoneatur nihil aliud se quam Dominum cogitare debere Therefore the Priest after the Preface before the Prayer prepareth the mindes of the brethren saying Lift vp your heartes that while the common people answere wee lift them vp vnto the Lord they may be instructed to thinke vpon no other thing but the Lord. What need is there to stand vpon this poynt any longer Sozomenus sheweth plainely in his Historie that in his time which was more then 400. yeares after Christ the people and the Clergie did sing Psalmes in the Church togeather So S. Hierome testifieth of the Church of Rome that in his time the people sounded out Amen with such an eccho as if it had been with an heauenly Thunder Nicolaus Lyranus that great learned popish Doctor in his Commentaries vpon S. Paul to the Corinthians affirmeth to his Readers very constantly that in the Primatiue Church both the Prayers and all other thinges were in the Vulgar tongue Yea S. Basil sayth that in his time all the people sang Psalmes togeather in the Church And he addeth therevnto that it was the custome of all Churches so to doe By these Testimonies it is cleare and euident that in the Primatiue Church and many yeares after the Church seruice was euerywhere in the Vulgar tongue S. Gregorie sometime Byshoppe of Rome himselfe reporteth the vsuall practise of the Greeke Church which he approoueth to haue been as we haue already heard out of S. Chrysostome and other famous Greeke Writers And that which our Fryer sayth of the same Gregorie is too too childish ridiculous as it is euident by that which is already said shall God willing be yet more euident before the end of this discourse Our Iesuite heere by way of a digression more then extrauagant giueth a very short but too too sweete an admonition In which he pleaseth himselfe more then a litle with his old doting foolerie and rusty rotten Poperie He telleth his Readers whom he would gladly perswade to giue credite to his wordes that our Ceremonies are pild patches of Protestanisme rusty ragges of the Reformed Congregation and withall forsooth that our Communion Booke it selfe was neuer heard of in the whole world till the late dayes of King Edward the sixt My answere to this extrauagant and foolish admonition I purpose in God to set downe in the last Chapter of this Discourse My reason hereof is this My scope intent and purpose in this present Booke is bipartite or two folde viz. to prooue soundly and plainely to lay open to all iudicious honest and indifferent Readers that the Religion Fayth and Doctrine of the late Byshoppes Church of Rome is indeed the New religion by litle and litle crept into the Church and distinctly to name the time when and the Authors by whom euery materiall poynt Article of the new Romish Fayth and Religion did first begin as also to prooue soundly and clearely that the Fayth and Doctrine this day established in the Church of England is Catholique Apostolicall and the Old Romane religion For which respect I haue thought it meete and conuenient first to accomplish and finish the former member in proouing Poperie the New Religion And that done to prooue the Doctrine and Fayth of our English Church to be the Old Religion Which to performe as is sayd I haue steadfast confidence in my mercifull GOD all sufficient who woonderfully preseruing me from many dangers almost ineffable seemeth to haue reserued me to that end and purpose God make me thankfull and euer to referre all that I well doe to his most holy name Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam Thou ô God who hast chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise and the weake thinges to confound the mightie things thou who by
quoniam est pars satisfactionis aliter enim Ecclesia deciperet paenitenies Such a Fast he speaketh of the Fastes which Priestes enioyne is sacramentally really and properly satisfactorie The reason is because it is a part of satisfaction for otherwise the Church should deceiue the Penitentes In an other place the same Iosephus Angles hath these expresse wordes Ieiunium quadragesimale eo modo quo ab Ecclesia seruatur nes suit a Christo institutum neque ab eo iussum sed ab hominibus atque ita non est de iure diuino sed humano duntaxat Christus enim nec tempus talis ieiunij nec modum neque cibos instituit Statim enim post Baptismum in desertum secessit et illic ieiunauit Christus nullum diem a ieiunio excepit in illo quadragenario numero Ecclesia vero dies dominicos excipit Christus tunc semel nec pluries commedit neque bibit In Ecclesia vero vna refectio tantum est concessa et in potatione nulla est limitatio Quare cum nec verbo neque facto hoc ieiunium instituerit ab Ecclesia institutum erit The Lent-fast as the Church obserueth it was neither instituted of Christ nor of him commaunded but of men so as it is not stablished by Gods Law but by mans onely for Christ neither instituted the time of such a Fast nor the manner nor the Meates for so soone as he was Baptized he went into the Desart and fasted there Christ excepted no day from fasting in his Fast of Fourtie dayes but the Romish Church excepteth the Sundayes Christ neither eate nor dranke more then once but the Church graunteth Meate once a day and for drinking maketh no restraint Wherefore seeing Christ neither appoynted Lent-fast by word nor by deed it must be ordayned of the Church Where I may not forget to adde that the same Byshoppe Angles telleth vs in an other place that albeit the Apostles ordeyned Lent-fast yet may the Pope free deliuer whom he will from the keeping thereof And he yeeldeth this reason for the same Because forsooth the Pope hath as great Power in the gouernement of the Church as the Apostles had Thus disputeth our Popish Byshop telling vs plainely that Christ did not ordaine Lent-fast which he prooueth by many reasons As also that none are bound to Fast in Lent who haue gotten the Popes Dispensation to free them from it no not if the Apostles appoynted it Thirdly he graunteth freely that the Papistes Fast to satisfie God for their sinnes I therefore must perforce conclude that the Popish Lent-fast is a rotten ragge of the New religion The 29. Chapter of the annulling of Popish Wedlocke B. C. WHatsoeuer sayth Bell the Byshoppe of Rome holdeth and defineth that must euery Papist hold beleeue and maintaine as an Article of his Fayth Though generally all Catholiques doe hold the Popes Definitions to be infallible and the contrarie opinion to be erroneous ye is it not an Article of Fayth T. B. Whosoeuer shall seriously peruse my Tryall this Answere of the Jesuite to the same and this my Reply in defence of my Tryall can not but vnderstand that Poperie is meere foolerie and flatly opposite to the sacred Word of God This in briefe is my Answere First that albeit this Chapter being the 29. of my Tryall arguing against the annulling of Popish Wedlocke conteyne not fully 26. lynes yet is the Jesuite so afrayde with the plentifull matter soundly handled therein yet in briefe manner as he dareth not once touch or name the same for feare of burning him For proofe whereof I wish the indifferent Reader to peruse my Tryall of the New religion Secondly that it is most true that what the Pope defyneth that must euery Papist hold and beleeue as an Article of his Fayth I prooue it by many inuincible reasons Couarrunias a very famous popish Byshop and renowned Canonist hath these expresse wordes Nec me later D. Thomam praeuia maxima deliberatione asserere Rom. Pontificem non posse propria dispensatione continentiae solemne Monactiorum votum tollere Et Paulo Post. oportet tamen primam opinionem defendere ne quae passim fiant euertantur omnino Neither am I ignorant that S. Thomas the popish Angelicall Doctor whose Doctrine sundry Popes haue confirmed affirmeth after great deliberation that the Byshop of Rome can not with his Dispensation take away from Monkes their solemne Vow of Chastitie This notwithstanding we must defend the first opinion least those thinges which are practised euery where be vtterly ouerthrowë The Popish canonized Saint Antoninus and Syluester Prieras some time maister of the Popes sacred Pallace and for his great Learning surnamed Absolutus Theologus tell vs plainely and constantly that whatsoeuer the Pope doth whether we can prooue the same or no◠yet must we beleeue it to be so And which passeth all the rest yea which is woonderfull if not incredible to proceed from a Papistes mouth S. R. that Learned man as our Fryer B. C. tearmeth him hath these expresse wordes in his pretensed Answere to the Downe-fall of Poperie Because Byshoppes must not examine the Doctrine which the Pope deliuereth iudicially out of S. Peters Chaire as supreame Pastor of Gods Churth but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion Aquinas himselfe shall giue the vpshot of this game these are his expresse wordes Christus poterat relaxare ergo et Paulus potuit ergo et Papa potest qui non est minoris potestatis in Ecclesia quam Paulus fuit Christ could pardone therefore Paul could pardone therefore the Pope also can pardone as who is of no lesse or meaner Authoritie in the Church then Paul himselfe was Thirdly that seeing our Fryer graunteth all Papistes generally to hold the Popes Definitions to be infallible and the contrary Opinion to be erroneous he sheweth himselfe to be a very noddie and at a flat non-plus in denying the same to be an Article of Popish fayth I prooue it marke well my wordes by a triple Argument First because the Pope his Cardinals Iesuites and all popish Diuines can not but abound with falsehood deceite coozenage and fraudulent trickes of Legierdemaine if they teach the people to hold and receiue that as true Doctrine which themselues beleeue not to be so Secondly because the Pope his Cardinals Iesuites and all Papistes generally are bound to beleeue euery trueth agreeable to Gods word And consequently that either all Papistes beleeue the Popes Definitions to be infallible and the contrary opinion to be erroneous or else that the same is not a trueth agreeable to Gods word Thirdly that Poperie must perforce be a most miserable dangerous wretched damnable Religion if all Papistes generally hold that for an vndoubted Doctrine which is no part of their Fayth and Religion For all Iesuites and Iesuited Papistes hold that the Church is built vpon Peter
second Chapter of this present Volume To this let vs adde a most notable testimonie of our Rhemistes which is comprised in these very wordes Notorious is the saying of S. Augustine concerning S. Cyprian who being a blessed Catholique Byshop and Martyr yet erred about the rebaptizing of such as were Christined by Heretiques If he had liued sayth S. Augustine to haue seene the determination of a plenarie Councell which he saw not in his life time he would for his great humilitie and charitie straight way haue yeelded preferred the generall Councell before his owne Iudgement and his fellow Byshops in a prouinciall Councell onely Thus dispute our Rhemistes confounding them-selues and their Pope vnawares For first they tell vs marke well my wordes that S. Cyprian was a blessed Byshop and Martyr and therefore would haue yeelded to the Decree of a generall Councell They tell vs secondly that S. Augustine was of the same opinion In which double Narration the Rhemistes confound them-selues with their Pope and all his deuoted Popelinges For they giue vs to vnderstand very plainely that neither the Pope is aboue a generall Councell neither yet his Iudgement infallible But how prooue I that This forsooth is a plaine demonstration thereof S. Cyprian and S. Augustine being both of them very Holy very Learned Fathers could not but know right well for their great Learning what Authoritie Power Priuiledges and Prerogatiues Christ had giuen to the Byshops of Rome And without all question it is it can not be denyed that for their great pietie and humilitie they would humbly haue acknowledged and highly reuerenced all Power giuen them by our Lord Iesus Yet true it is sir Fryer marke well my wordes that Pope Cornelius togeather with a nationall Synode of the Byshoppes of Jtaly had made a flatte decree concerning Rebaptization True it is likewise that Pope Stephanus had confirmed the same Decree and commaunded it to be obserued True it is thirdly that all Papistes of late dayes doe obstinately affirme as our Rhemistes in the name of all Papistes tell vs that the Pope is aboue a generall Councell that the Pope can not erre Iudicially that the Popes Iudgement is infallible Now this Decree made by Pope Cornelius and confirmed by Pope Stephanus S. Cyprian knew right well neither was S. Austen ignorant thereof Howbeit this notwithstanding S. Cyprian roundly withstood the Decree of Pope Stephanus and both sharpely reprooued him and vtterly contemned his falsely pretended Authoritie S. Austen in like manner held the same opinion with S. Cyprian concerning the Popes falsely pretended Prerogatiues infallibilitie of Iudgement neuer excusing any such thing in S. Cyprian as a fault neither once saying that the Pope was Christes Vicar or that Christ had prayed that his Fayth should not fayle but constantly telling the Reader for his full satisfaction on S. Cyprians behalfe that he would humbly haue yeelded to the Decree of a plenarie Councell if any such had been in his time In which wordes S. Austen giueth the Reader to vnderstand that though S. Cyprian did contemne both the definitiue Sentence of the Pope and the Decree of his prouinciall Councell because neither of their Iudgements was infallible yet would he haue yeelded to the Decree of a plenarie Councell as which he acknowledged to be infallible and to haue the assistannce of the holy Ghost Let vs adde further that the two hundred seauenteene Fathers in the Aphrican Councell whereof S. Augustine was one were so farre from acknowledging the Byshop of Rome to be Christes Vicar generall vpon earth to be aboue a plenarie Councell and his Iudgement to be infallible that they all with one assent refused vtterly to graunt any such Prerogatiue or Priuiledge vnto him constantly affirming that he was bound as well as they to obey the Decrees of the Nicene Councell For which cause neither would the said Fathers graunt greater Power and Prerogatiues to the Byshoppes of Rome neither did the Byshoppes of Rome them-selues challenge greater Power then the Canons of the Nicene Synode would affoorde them Of which poynt I haue disputed at large in the second Chapter afore-going Whosoeuer shall seriously peruse that whole Chapter from the beginning to the end thereof will vndoubtedly rest satisfied in this behalfe Ioyne this with my Tryall and Poperie will prooue it selfe the New religion The 31. Chapter conteyning according to my promise an Answere to the Iesuites short admonition in the 16. Chapter aforegoing as also to some other patches elsewhere dispearsed to the same effect T. B. HAuing euidently prooued and plainely conuinced by the power of God and the assistance of his holy Spirit that Poperie is the New religion it followeth consequently that I prooue the Fayth Doctrine this day professed and by Authoritie established in the Church of England to be the Old Religion I therefore heartily craue the gentle Readers attentiue hearing vnto the end of my Discourse I haue not hitherto in any of my former Bookes oppugned the Old Romane Religion which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Church of Rome while they liued heere on earth Neither doe I at this present or euer intend hereafter in any future worke to oppugne the same It is the late Fayth and late Romish Doctrine which I contend to be the New Religion euery maine poynt whereof I haue clearely conuinced when and by whom it first began Our Church of noble England constantly reteyneth euery Article and iote of the old Romane Religion onely reiecting and abolishing of the essentiall partes of late Romish Fayth and Doctrine so much as was Hereticall erroneous or superstitious and repugnant to the eternall trueth of Gods most sacred word And concerning late Romish ceremonies such so many as were either superstitious or ridiculous or vnprofitable to the Church of God So that wee are this day the true reformed Catholiques euen as the Fryers at Rome commonly called Capuchoâ—nes are indeed the true reformed Franciscans The Church of England doth not this day hold any Article of Fayth or Doctrine or vse any Ceremonie saue such onely as we are able to iustifie either by the expresse wordes of the holy Scripture and by the approbation of best approoued Antiquitie or else to deduce the same from thence by a necessarie ineuitable consequence Let vs now in Gods name heare attentiuely what our Iesuite in the name of all Papistes is able to obiect against the Fayth and Doctrine of the Church of England B. C. COncerning Ceremonies and such like Bell in his Regiment of the Church graunteth freely that the Church hath Authoritie to ordaine and abrogate to make or repeale Lawes as shall seeme most meete for the honour of God and the edification of Christian people T. B. Bell admitteth all this Say on good Fryer if happily thou haue any better Bread in thy Bagge seeing this is not worth a silly Ragge Howbeit our Fryer for want of matter
time and who they were that composed the partes thereof When as neither Durandus nor any other make the essentiall and very substantiall part of the Masse that is the wordes of Consecration to haue come from any other then the Sonne of God But they speake of the accidentall partes thereof to weet either deuout Prayers or Ceremonies which we willingly graunt to proceed from the institution of Christes Church T. B. I answere first that our Fryer giueth both the Pope and Poperie a deadly wound while he telleth vs that Durandus and others note at what time and who they were that composed the partes of their popish Masse Secondly that while our Fryer Iesuite maketh one onely essentiall part of their popish Masse that is the wordes of Consecration he graunteth that all the rest be Accidentall and so may be taken away from the same To which Doctrine I very willingly subscribe assuring the Iesuite that they and we shall soone agree if the Pope will thus reforme their Masse in abolishing all the accidentall partes here so named from the same Thirdly that I haue already prooued the word enim in the consecration of the Bread to be either of Mans institution or else the Deuils Fourthly that S. Thomas of â—â—quine Durâ—nâ— and other learned Papistes doe constantly affirme that God can not by his diuine power cause one the same body to be in diuers places at once And consequently that our Iesuites must either deny Christes body to be in Heauen contrary to the expresse wordes of holy Scripture or else that Christes body his flesh blood and bones can not be in their popish Masse or thirdly that the wordes of Popish Consecration came from some greater power then is in God which for all that no Papist dareth to auouch Fiftly that the wordes which are vsed in the popish Consecration of Wine came not from the Sonne of God I prooue it by the testimonie of Iosephus Angles that famous popish Byshoppe and learned Schoole-doctor whose expresse wordes are these Forma consecrationis Calicis qua Romana vtitur Ecclesia est sufficiens traditur enim ab Euangelistis et verba qua ab Ecclesia interpoâ—untur scilicâ—t nouâ— et aâ—erni testaments misterium fidei forma qua Christus consecrauit sensum handmutanâ— The forme of the Consecration of the Chalice or Cuppe which the Church of Rome vseth is sufficient for it is deliuered by the Euangelist and the wordes which the Church interlaceth to weet of the new and eternall Testament the misterie of Fayth doe not change the sense of the forme in which Christ did consecrate Thus writeth Byshop Angles plainely insinuating to his Readers that the Church of Rome vseth an other forme of Consecration then Christ himselfe did vse And consequently that the wordes of Consecration vsed in the Romish Church came not from the Sonne of God Ergo the Romish forme of Consecration is a Ragge of the New religion Sixtly that the Papistes can not tell indeed which be the precise wordes of their popish Consecration although that be the most principall and the very essentiall part of popish Masse and consequently of all popish Fayth and Religion I prooue it most euidently because Byshoppe Angles rehearseth foure seuerall opinions concerning this precise Article of popish Fayth these are his expresse words Quatuor sunt opiniones Prima S. Thomae qui omnia praedicta verba dicit esse de essentiaformae Secunda opinio est Alexandri D. Bonauenturae et Durandâ— qui affirmant de necessitate consecrationis Calicis esse haec sola verba scilicet hic est sanguis meus Tertia opinio dicit haec verba scilicet hic est sanguis meus qui pro â—ultis effundetur in remissionem peccatoruÌ„ esse de necessitate consecrationis praetermissis alijs verbis quae ab Ecclesia Romana adduntur qua forma vturtur Graeci Quarta opinio est Scoti qui ait de haec quastione nihil certitudinalitor esse nobis traditum There be foure opinions S. Thomas holdeth the first who auoucheth all the aforenamed words to be of the essence of the forme The second opinion is Alexanders Bonauentures and Durandus who affirme that these onely wordes are of the necessitie of the consecration of the Chalice or Cuppe to weet This is my blood The third opinion affirmeth these wordes This is my blood which shal be shed for many for remission of sinnes to be of the necessitie of ConsecratioÌ„ not the other wordes which the Church of Rome addeth to them Scotus the popish Doctor Subtilis holdeth the fourth opinion auouching that they know not certainely what to hold or thinke of this matter This is the best popish Diuinitie for the most essentiall part of all Poperie that the best learned Papistes are able to affoord vs so as euery child is well able to discerne that the now Romish Fayth is the New religion B. C. What doth Bell and such like Ministers that deride the Ceremonies and partes of the Masse but mocke and mow at their owne Communion-booke and partes thereof being borrowed from vs or in what they differ can shew no greater antiquitie then the late dayes of Edward the sixt at what time diuers Ministers did hammer them in the forge of their owne inuention T. B. This is that which the Pope and his deuoted Vassals neuer cease to instill into the hearts and eares of silly Papistes that so they may falsely perswade them that the Popish Fayth is the Old and ours the New Religion Wherefore albeit I haue againe and againe prooued most euidently that the Fayth and Doctrine which the Romish Church this day holdeth and teacheth is the New Religion neuerthelesse seeing these wordes heere obiected doe in some sort as it were insinuate to the Reader the most principall and maine poynt of the whole controuersie I am very willing to vndergoe the paines how great soeuer for the better contentment and full satisfaction of all such as desire to know the trueth I answere thus first that the Church of Rome receiued the true Catholique Apostolique Faith in the dayes of S. Peter and S. Paul which S. Paul himselfe testified while he affirmed their Fayth to he renowmed in the whole world Secondly that the Church of England receiued the same Catholique and Apostolique Fayth from the good Byshoppes of Rome at their first conuersion vnto the Fayth of Christ Iesus Explico Brutani now called England first receiued the Christian Fayth by Faganus and Deruvianus sent from Elutherius the good Byshoppe of Rome at the earnest request of Lucius then King of Brutani which was in the yeare 179. after Christ. After that Ethelbert the first Christian King of the Saxons was conuerted to the Fayth of Christ by Augustine Melitus Justus and others sent from Gregorie an other good Byshoppe of Rome in the yeare 596. after Christ. Thirdly that from that time vntill these our
ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue pag. 17.19 A.D. 1415. The Fryer killeth himselfe with his owne sword Note well the answere This is veriâ—â—ed in the Gun-powder Iesuited vassals Marke well this answere See my Anatomie where this is plainely prooued A.D. 1415. O new borne Popery where is thy mother where is thy Godfather where is thy christianitie None euer heard of thee for the space of 1414. yeares after Christ. A generall Councell is aboue the Pope Gers. in Serm. coram concil Const. V prim part Gers. prim part in tract de appellat a Papa circa med Gers. vbi supr in 2. propos Gers. in serm coram Concil Const. K. prim part To this doctrine I willingly agree See my Anatomy pag. 137. All Papistes are Heretikes Rhem. in 16. Mat. 22. Luk. 15. Act. 18. All Papistes are Heretikes Rhem. in 15. Act. v. 28. ex Aug. libr. 2. de baptis cap. 4. Florint Cypriauâ—â— A.D. 250. Aug. A.D. 419. Marke well this poynt Supr cap. 2. prope finem The old Romane religion was the true Catholique Church The Papistes are the deformed and wee the reformed Catholiques in very deed B.C. pag. 136. All this is true but nothing to the purpose B.C. page 138. The Iesuite is full of vanitie and lying Marke well the answere B·C. page 136. See the Regiment cap. 14. page 183 184.185.187 170.166.200 128.125.155.119 Act. 19. v. 24.25 Marke well this poynt The right end is edification 1. Cor. 14 v. 14. v. 26.16 See and note my Regiment pag. 183.185.200.198.199 1. Cor. 14. v. 27.40 Marke well gentle reader B.C. pag. 135. Beda lib. 2. hist. cap. 2. Super cap. 16. note the chapter well Aug. confess lib. 1 cap. 14. de doctr Christ. lib. 2. cap. 13. de Catechi rud cap. 9. et in Psal. 123.128 Foolish zeale doth much hurt to the Church 1. Cor. 14. v. 26 1. Cor. 14. per totum V. 8. V. 9. V. 11. V. 13. V. 14. Chrysost. in 1. Cor. hom 35. Theodoretus in 1. Cor. 14. Phoâ—ius ibideÌ„ V. 16. V. 19. V. 26. Suruey part 3. cap. 10. pag. 477. Lyran. in 1. Cor. 14. Basill in ep ad cler Neocaesar ep 62. Rhem. in 1 Cor. 14. v. 14. Marke well this answere V. 15. Mat. 15. v. 8. V. 13. et V. 28. Chrysost. in 1. Cor. hem 35. Loe S. Chrysostome doth very sharply reprooue them that haue the diuine Seruice in a tongue vnknowne Conc. Later sub Innoc. 3. cap 9. A.D. 1215. See Suruey et supra cap. 23. 1. Cor. 14. v. 26.40 Things good in their owne nature are prophaned in the popish Masse None but popish Priestes may say Dominus vobiscuÌ„ Popish Deacons may not say The Lord be with you 1. Cor. 14. v. 16.40 B.C. page 140. Marke well this reduplication Mat. 26.27 Mar. 14.22 Luke 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 Math. 26.27 Luk. 22.19 Masse and Communion are all one in the true sense and meaning Confirmatio prima Ioseph Angles in 4. sentent part 1 p. 102. Marke the vncertaintie of popish Consecration Confirm 2. Sot apud Angels in 4. s. p. 102. Ios. Angl. in 4. s. p. 103. Apud 10. Angl. in 4. s. p. 144. Iosep. Angles vbi supra Angl. vbi supra p. 105. Mat. 26.27 Mar. 14.22 Luk. 22.19 1. Cor. 11.24 Quartò prinâ—ipaliter Deut. 4.2 Deut. 5.32 Deut. 12.32 Reuel 22.18 1. Cor. 14. v. 27. 1. Sam. 5.2 See my Suruey the Downefall the Iesuites Antepast 1. Cor. 10.31 Rom. 16.27 Ier. 9.24 Psal. 115.1 Gal. 1.5 Ephes. 1.12 B.C. pag. 140. Accidens potest adesse et abesse citra subiecti interitum Apud Ioseph Angles in 4 â— part 1. pag. 151. Act. 3.11 Chistes be dyâ— flesh blood bones in the popish Masse Ios. Angl. in 4. s. part 1. pag. 104. concl 1. Loe Popish Masse is the New religion Ios. Angles vbi supra pag. 104. Ios. Angles vbisupra pag. 104. B.C. pag. 141. Our Church was stayned with many errors vntill the time of King Edward when it was restored to the auncienâ— puritie of Fayth and Doctrine Rom. 1.8 A.D. 179. Tertio principaliter See the ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue chap. 4. pag. 66 The Papistes can name no â—ote of the old Romane religion which is not still kept in our Church of England See marke well my Dialogue chapter 4. pag. 92. Apud Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 32. Victor de potest Papae et coÌ„c rel 4. pag. 151. et paulaâ—â—m c. Io. Angles in 2. sent pag. 275. part 2. See S. R. pag. 281. et B.C. pag. 76. Polyd. lib. 4. cap. 9. pag. 39. Couaâ—ruu to 1. c. 20. part 11. in med col 1. Angl. in 4. s. p. 1. pag. 133. Conc. Later Sic enim Apostoli statuerunt et sancta Romana tenet Ecclesia Preface pag. 15. Chalenges doe occupie no place they are adiectiues which can not stand without subiectes The Author still so protesteth that he will performe his promise The Iesuite dareth not dispute and therefore requireth new conditions Preface pag. 18.
come from Cyrillus Byshop of Alexandria Atticus Byshop of Constantinople which tryall being duely made by the true Copies the Popes forgerie was manifest and the holy Fathers protested constantly that they could no longer endure such arrogant and smoakie statelinesse B. C. Bell also both in his other Bookes and in this Pamphlet in the next Chapter obiecteth out of Socrates That a Canon was made in the Nicene Councell by the suggestion of Paphnutius which permitted Priestes to remaine with their former Wiues But this Canon is no where to be found amongst those twentie T. B. I answere first that if a Penall Law were made to hang vpon the Gallowes all falsaries and lying wretches then ought this impudent shamelesse Iesuite to be hanged many times where once would serue the turne For if we shall search froÌ„ the East to the West from the North to the South yet shall we neuer be able to find out a more shamelesse lyar or a more notorious falsary then is this Iesuite Secondly that if Popery were not the New Religion in verie deed such forgerie such lying and such deceitfull dealing would not be vsed in defence thereof Out vpon lying Jesuites fie vpon rotten Popery away with all such beggerly trumperie Thirdly that the Doctrine by me deliuered both in the next Chapter and in my Suruay is so farre from being as the lying Jesuite impudently auoucheth who seemeth to be composed intrinsecally of lying that it is flatte against the same and able to torment the Jesuites conscience if he haue any left while breath is in his body God for his mercy-sake either soundly conuert such lying wretches or else confound them euerlastingly The Iesuite durst not deale with mee as I do with him and others that is set downe my expresse wordes and that done make application of the same Hee began with lying euen in the highest degree hee continueth still in lying and hee hath no other meanes in the world but either to end with lying or else to confesse Poperie to be the new Religion This is such an vndoubted trueth as I am not afrayde to die in the same My words in the next Chapter concerning this poynt are in one place these viz. For this respect did holy Paphuntius stand vp in the Councell of Nice at such time as the Fathers then there assembled thought to haue seuered married Priestes and Byshops from their Wiues and told them according to Gods word that to forbid marriage to Priestes was too seuere a Law In an other place of the selfe same Chapter my wordes to the same effect are these Thirdly seeing Priestes marriage was holden for lawfull in the famous Councell of Nice and that the holy Byshoppe Paphuntius did pronounce openly in the same that the coniugall actes of married Priestes was true chastitie whose sentence was approued of the whole Councell and therevpon the matter was left as indifferent for euery Priest either to marry or not to marry at his owne free choyce In my Suruay likewise two places doe manifestly conuince our impudent lying Jesuite In the former place these are my expresse wordes Thirdly that although Socrates Sozomenus ascribe it to the old traditioÌ„ of the Church for vnmarried Priestes so to continue yet doth not Casioâ—orus make any mention thereof in his Tripartite Collection And howsoeuer Paphuntius alleadged Tradition to mitigate the seuere Lawes intended by the Councell yet is it very certaine that such Tradition was neither generall nor diuine In the latter place these are my very wordes I say fourthly that the Tradition which Socrates and Sozomenus speake of was by example not by doctrine as both Gratianus the Glosse expounde them These are my very wordes in foure seuerall places which doe so condemne the Iesuite in his owne conscience that hee durst not for his Lugges once name them or truely set them downe For I was so farre from saying That the Nicene Fathers made any Canon in this behalfe that my wordes now truely recounted do plainely conuince the flat contrary But marke well the third place in my said Suruay where I haue these expresse wordes The Law which the Fathers theÌ„ thought to haue made was a new Law neuer heard of before I prooue it Because Socrates hath these words Visum erat Episcopis legem nouaÌ„ in EcclesiaÌ„ intraducere The Byshoppes thought indeede to haue brought a new Law into the Church But the Councell was perswaded with Paphuntius his oration and referred the whole matter to euery Priestes free election making no Law in that behalfe For Cassiodorus hath these expresse wordes Synodusque laudauit sententiam eius et nihil ex hac parte sanciuit sed hoc in vniuscuiusê™ voluntate non in necessitate dimisit And the Synode commended his opinion and so decreed nothing in the matter but left it in euery mans election to doe what hee thought good without compulsion I therefore conclude that albeit the Byshops in the Councell of Nice assembled would indeed haue made a new and strange Law against the marriage of Priestes yet did the spirit of God speaking in Paphuntius vtterly disswade them from that vngodly purpose These are my wordes truely recounted both out of my next Chapter and out of my Suruay which being so what reward ought our Jesuite to haue Euen an Halter about his necke and to be hanged vp on the Gibbet for his horrible falsehood and most notorious lying Bell sayth our Iesuite obiecteth out of Socrates that a Canon was made in the Nicene Councell by the suggestion of Paphuntius Bell saith the true Bell indeed truly affirmeth out of Socrates that the Fathers thought to haue made a new Law but through the perswasion of holy Paphuntius made none indeed True Bell saith that the spirit of God speaking in Paphuntius did vtterly diswade the Fathers from that vngodly purpose Bell saith the Fathers intended to haue made a Law but made none indeed Hold fast this trueth The Jesuite saith Bell affirmeth the Fathers to haue made a Law Remember this shamelesse lyer To be short Bell had rather want both his Armes both his Legges and both his Eyes then to vse such lying false-dealing and coozening trickes as our Iesuite hath in common vse and custome For it is one thing to intend the making of the Law an other thing to make the Law indeed B. C. These Canons of Appeale being found formally in the Councell of Sardica where Appellations to Rome are ratified and confirmed both Pope Sozimus and others call them by the name of the Nicene Canons though they be found in the Councell of Sardica And the reason is for that these two Councels are accounted for all one both because the same Fathers that were present at Nice were also a great number of them at Sardica and also for that no new thing touching Fayth was there enacted T. B. I answere first that if Pope
great consequence may be perswaded by the aduise of his graue Councellours that his corporall presence were necessarie and therevpon resolue with himselfe to goe in proper person Yet in such a case it can neither truly nor properly be sayd That the King was sent of his Subiectes but that hee tooke the iourney in hand freely and of his owne accord though perhappes the rather by their aduise To that of our Iesuite where he sayth That S. Paul being inferiour to S. Peter reprehended him and that Bell if he were a Byshoppe would looke as the Diuell looked ouer Lincolne and none might admonish him of any fault I answere in this manner First that our Fryer doth too much iniurie to S. Paul while he maketh him inferiour to S. Peter and withall doth no little dishonour to his Popes who in all their Pardons Dispensations and such like trumperie doe euer rely vpon the ioynt authoritie of S. Peter and S. Paul grounding their power and soueraigntie in them both For S. Paul receiued not his Authoritie from any mortall man but from God himselfe immediately Yea himselfe sayth of himselfe that hee had as great Power as Peter th' one ouer the Iewes th' other ouer the Gentiles Secondly that euery Apostle receiued from Christ himselfe equall Power ouer the whole World euery one of the eleuen hauing the same Commission that Peter had Thirdly that our Jesuite seemeth better acquainted with the Diuell then he is with God as who beareth his Reader in hand that he knoweth how the Diuell looked ouer Lincolne Fourthly that not Bell but the Pope is the man who may carry thousandes of soules into Hell and yet no man may say vnto him Why doest thou so This is alreadie prooued in the Conclusions aforegoing Heere I deeme it not amisse for the complement of the Popes falsely pretended Soueraigntie to adioyne a testimonie of one of his holy Martyrs by way of digression The Digression THe Secular popish Priestes aswell French as English haue published in print may Bookes in which they haue most liuely pourtrayed and paynted out the Iesuites in their best beseeming colours They affirme constantly in their sayd Bookes of the Iesuites in generall that they be Proud men Tyrantes Coozeners Thieues Gypsies Murderours and men of no Religion Of Robert Parsons that trayterous and foule-mouthed Jesuite in particular that hee is a Bastard a notorious Drunkard a Deceiuer a Traytor a prouoker of others to Treason the Monster of mankind a Farie-brat begotten of some Incubus and what not All which are plainely and truly related in my Booke intituled The Anatomie of Popish tyrannie Which Booke hee that hath not seene and read may seeme to be ignorant of the deepest poyntes of Iesuiticall Theologie These Bookes do so gall wound the Jesuites at the very heart as they know not in the world what to say or answere in that behalfe Clerke and Watson lately executed for their most notorious treasons wrote sundry Bookes against the sayd Jesuites This Iesuite B. C. is so mightily assayled and turmoyled with that which I cite out of Watson that in one place to weete in his Epistle about the 27. page hee hath these wordes The Author he alleadgeth is some Quodlibetarian Minister though poore Watson beareth the name But in an other place to weete in the eight Chapter of this present Pamphlet he writeth thus Bell sheweth smal conscience in belying the dead and laying more faultes vpon him vniustly when alasse hee had otherwise too many Againe Watson speaketh of matters of fact In which twaine the Iesuite flatly contradicteth himselfe In the former hee would gladly finde out an other Author But in the latter hee vnawares fathereth the Booke vpon Watson telling Bell that hee belyeth the dead To which I adde that Watson vpon his death did acknowledge himselfe to be the Author The Iesuites third Chapter of the Marriage of Priestes and Ministers of the Church THe Jesuite greatly lamenting that the prohibition of the Marriage of Priestes can not be iustified not daring to deale with my Suruey where the same is most largly handled all Obiections and difficulties which possibly can be imagined distinctly soundly answered complayneth grieuously that I seeke to deceiue my reader in not proouing in my Tryall what I say for the same but referring the Reader to my Suruey The truth is this that in the Tryall I meant onely to shew to all simply seduced Papistes that late Popish Faith and Doctrine was not the old as they ignorantly beleeue but the new Religion in verie deede And my purpose was to effect the matter with such breuitie as euery one might buy the Treatise for a small peece of money and carry it in his Bosome about with him and so be able to poynt as it were with his Finger against all such as boast of Poperie as of the old Religion when and by whom euery maine poynt of late Papistrie first began Our Jesuite seeing their Pope confounded and their Fayth and Doctrine prooued to be the New religion can not tell in the world what to doe say or thinke for and in the defence thereof Let vs heare his owne wordes thus doth he write It serueth not the turne saith he to tell vs that he hath done it in his Suruay I therefore to content our Fryer Jesuite if it will be am heere resolued to set downe such speciall kindes of proofe deriued and taken out of my Suruay as are able to perswade all indifferent Readers that the Marriage of Priestes euer was and this day is both honest lawfull by Gods law and onely prohibited by the wicked and cursed Lawes of men the Byshops of Rome I meane The first Proposition All Ministers which are not Papistes nor subiect to the lawes and rules of Poperie may lawfully Marry euen by the doctrine of the Church of Rome I prooue it because all such Ministers are meere Lay-men by the iudgement of the Church of Rome which Church for all that and none other debarreth Priestes and other Ministers of the Church from the freedome of honourable Wedlocke This Assertion is plaine and euident it needeth no proofe at all The 2. Proposition Marriage was euer lawfull for all Priestes and other Ministers of the Church during all the time of the Old Testament This Proposition is cleare to all such as shall duely reuolue the holy Bibles For the holy Prophet Jeremie was the sonne of Helkiah who was one of the Priestes that were at Anathoth Hophni and Phinehaâ— were the sonnes of Helj the Priest Sephora was the daughter of Jethro the Priest of Midian S. John the Baptist who was the precursor of our Lord Iesus was the sonne of Zacharias the Priest Yea the High Priest was appoynted by God himselfe to marry a Mayde of his owne people so honourable was the mariage of Priestes in his most holy sight The 3. Proposition Marriage is lawfull for Priestes and
single Vow is able to contract Matrimonie albeit he sinne in so contracting but the subiect of a solemne Vow is inabled to matrimoniall contract the transgressions of the Vow single and solemne are of the same nature or kind albeit he that maketh the solemne Vow sinneth more grieuously The reason is because the specificall difference of actes resteth in the obiectes and seeing there is one obiect of both the Vowes to weete to keepe chastitie the actes must be of the same nature or kind howbeit the transgression of the solemne Vow shall be greater by reason of the perfecter state Thus disputeth Fryer Josepth after the opinion of other popish Doctors And doubtlesse his Discourse is euident because euery specificall difference morall aryseth of the obiectes and consequently seeing the obiect of Vow single is one and the same with the Vow solemne the difference betweene them can no way be essentiall neither can the Vow solemne dissolue Matrimonie contracted forasmuch as the Vow single beeing intrinsecally the same can not doe it Marke well the next Proposition The 11. Proposition Matrimonie euen after the solemne Vow of Religion is with our Jesuites and Iesuited Papistes very lawfull and of force so it be done by and with the Popes Dispensation This doctrine is taught by many learned Papistes Antoninus Richardus Hugo Innocentius Conarrunias Nauarius and others The same Doctrine is confirmed euen by the reall and vsuall practise of sundry Popes It may suffice in regard of breuitie to alledge one in the name of all The Popish S. Antoninus sometime the Archbyshop of Florence hath these wordes Papa dispensare potest in statuto Concilij vmuersalis de Voto solennj per prâ—fessionem etiam patet quod licet Papa non possist facere quod professus non fuit professus potest tamen facere quod non sit obligatus religâ—oni et ad votum religionis quia in omni voto intelligitur excepta authoritate Papae Infra et communiter Canonistae tenent quod Papa potest dispensare in voto solenni religionis non quidem tantum vt sit religiosus et non seruet vota sed de religioso potest facere laicum ex magna causa vrgente The Pope can dispense in the Decrees of a Generall Councell It is also cleare that he can dispense in a solemne Vow of profession For albeit the Pope can not make a professed person not to haue been professed yet can hee this doe that the professed person shall neither be bound to his Religion nor to his Vow because we must vnderstand that in euery Vow the Popes authoritie is excepted And the Canonistes doe commonly hold that the Pope can dispense in the solemne Vow of Religion not onely that one be still a Religious person and keepe not his Vow but hee can also make of a Religious person a meere Lay-man vpon an vrgent cause To this Popish canonized Saint and famous Arch-byshoppe let it not grieue our M. Fryer if I adde the worthy testimonie of their famous Popish Canonist and great Diuine Martinus Nauarrus his wordes are these Papa dispensare potest cum Monacho iam professo vt contrabat matrimonium imo de facto multj Papae dispensarunt Loe the Pope when it pleaseth his Holynesse can make of Monkes meere Lay-men he can also make Monkes to continue Monkes still and for all that not to keepe their Vowes Yea how soeuer his Iesuites and Iesuited Popelinges cry out against the Marriage of Priestes yet can hee make the Marriage of Monkes and a fortiorj the Marriage of secular Priestes to be lawfull Marriage euen with his bare word I will say nothing of Couarruvias Richardus Paludanus Scotus Caietanus Josephus Angles and others for of their verdictes the Reader may find great plentie in my Suruay of Poperie See and marke well the fourth Proposition aforegoing Onely heere by the way I would tell our holy Father if it would please him to heare me that seeing he can with his word make the Marriage of Priestes lawfull it were good he should doe it for that which hee may read in the next Proposition The 12. Proposition The forced and coacted Chastitie of Priestes hath been such so intollerable euen by the confession of the best learned Papistes as nothing in the whole world hath brought more shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion more griefe to godly men The great famous Popish Cardinall Panormitanus doth prooue this Proposition so learnedly and with such Christian grauitie as it being well marked is able to confound all Papistes in the world these are his expresse wordes Continentia non est in Clericis secularibus de substantia ordinis nec de iure Diuino quia alias Graeci peccarent nec excusaret eos consuetudo Sequitur et non solum credo potestatem messe Ecclesiae hoc condendi sed credo pro bono et salute esset animarum quod esset salubre statutum vt volentes possint contrahere quia experientia docente contrarius prorsus effectus sequitur ex illa Lege continentiae cum hodie non viuant spiritualiter nec sint mundi sed maculantur illicito coitu cum eorum grauissimo peccato vbi cum propria vxore esset castitas Continencie in secular Priestes is neither of the substaunce of their Orders nor of the Law diuine For otherwise the Greekes should sinne and their Custome could not excuse them And I doe not onely beleeue that the Church can make such a Law but also that such a Law were for the good and for the saluation of soules that such as would might marrie for experience teacheth that a contrary effect followeth of that law of continencie seeing this day they liue not spiritually neither are they cleane but polluted in vnlawfull copulation with their most grieuous sinne though they might liue chastly with their owne Wiues Thus writeth learned Panormitanus the Popes famous Canonist his deare Abbot his reuerend Arch-bishop his honourable Cardinall Let vs now heare what Polydorus Virgilius a zealous learned Papist saith for hee seeing he was an Italian knew best the Italian and Romish fashion These are his expresse wordes I will neither adde to them nor take ought from them but will deale synceerely and truly though our Jesuite be farre from it not onely in this Booke but in whatsoeuer else I shall write hereafter euen vpon the perill of my soule Illud tamen dixerim tantum abfuisse vt ista coacta castitas illam coniugalem vicerit vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus plus mali religioni plus doloris omnibus bonis impresserit inusserit attulerit quam Sacerdotum libidinis labes proinde forsitan tam e republica Christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimonij Sacerdotibus restitueretur quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent quam se spurcissimè eiuscemodi
the matter Yet such a Booke I neuer saw to this day neither can I learne that any other hath seene the same But more hereof to speake fitter occasion will be offered hereafter And if I liue to see such a Booke extant it shall not God willing be long vnanswered Thirdly that I prooued it in the Tryall euen in this very Chapter to be a very rotten Ragge of the New religion And this I did performe in that place many wayes First by the expresse wordes of Syluester Pryeras a man so profound and learned that hee was by the Papistes surnamed Absolutus Theologus who constantly affirmeth that the Popes Pardons were neuer knowne to vs neither by the Scriptures nor yet by the auncient Fathers but onely by the late Writers Loe the Popes Pardons are so new that neither the Holy Scriptures nor yet the old Fathers knew them but the late Writers onely Ergo they must needes be Ragges of a New Religion How can the Fryer denie this withoutblushing His owne conscience accuseth him Hee can not tell doubtles what in the world to say or thinke Hee seeth euidently that Poperie is prooued the New Religion Hee perceiueth right well that hee is not able with all the helpe of his best friendes to defend the Pope from vtter shame Secondly by the flat testimonie of the Popish canonized Saint Antoninus sometime Archbyshop of the famous Citie of Florence who deliuereth the selfe same Doctrine that Syluester did Thirdly by the Doctrine of Petrus Lombardus their famous Maister of Sentences who though he with great diligence collected into one Volume all the worthy Sentences of the old Fathers could neuer for all that find the Popes Pardons or any mention thereof in any of their Writinges For as Syluester and Antoninus truely write the Old Writers were not acquainted with any such thing Fourthly by the free confession of M. Fisher that famous Popish so supposed Martir sometime Byshop of Rochester in noble England who in his Answere to M. Luthers Articles was enforced to admit the Newnes of the Popes Pardons To all which and much more plainely set downe in the Tryall our Iesuite sayth not one word Hee was so frighted forsooth with the Conclusion that hee durst not once touch the Premisses but passing them ouer in deepe silence hee curâ—alleth the Ergo and seuereth it from the Consequent because it did connotate plainely lay open to the Reader that the Premisses went before I wish the Reader to peruse the Tryall that so hee may see the coozening trickes of the proud Fryer Marke the Complement following The Complement of this Chapter FOr the better instruction of the Christian Reader and the vtter confusion of our Fryer and of all other Fryers Jesuites and Iesuited Popelinges let vs seriously ponder and constantly remember that there be two kindes of Pardons Th' one De pamtentijs iniunctis th' other Dâ—remissione peccatorum Concerning the former kinde which were onely relaxations or mittigations of Discipline and Canonicall Penance inioyned by the Church I graunt very willingly that in the primatiue and auncient succeding Churches they were very frequent and vsuall For in those dayes and ages such as were notorious offendours and had giuen publike scandall to the Church were enioyned by the Church to doe publique penaunce for their publique faultes before they could be admitted into the Church againe Which godly Discipline is this day obserued God be thanked for it in all particular Churches throughout this Realme of noble England Yea in the auncient Churches many yeares of penaunce or publique exercises of humiliation were ordained for euery publique grieuous Offence Wherevpon it came that when many penitent persons gaue euident signes of true internall remorse for their former scandalous conuersation then the Church thought good to giue to such penitent persons some relaxation of their so inioyned publique penaunce Which kind of Pardons the famous Councell of Nice of Arles of Ancyra and others did vsually giue to penitent persons Of which manner of pardoning the auncient Fathers Tertullianus Cyprianus Jrenaeus Eusebius Sozomenus and others doe often make relation But concerning the latter kind of late Popish Pardons that is of applying to whom they list and when they list aswell to the liuing as to the dead the Merites of Christ and of his Saintes as condigne satisfaction for their Sinnes no Scripture no Councell no Father no auncient approoued Historiographer maketh any mention at all Which trueth I haue so plainely prooued in my Booke of Motiues as no Papist in Europe is able to answere the same The Booke hath been extant in print now 15. whole yeares and to this day no answere though often promised will appeare But let our Iesuite proceed in his wonted maner B. C. I will adde one testimonie more of our Enemies the Waldenses who appeared to the world about the yeare 1270. as testifieth Claudius Cussordius and Guido one of whose Hereâ—â—es was against the Popes Pardons as is most certaine and Kemnitius confesseth which argueth that Parâ—ons were long in vse before the yeare 1300. And therefore be it knowen to Bell that he hath runge out a notorious vntrueth T. B. I answeare first that Waldenses appeared to the world one hundred yeares before the time our Fryer nameth viz. about the yeare 1169. and so hath hee in this poynt runge one notorious vntrueth though but a very small one in respect of his other manifold and most impudent lyes Secondly that Chemnitius doth not confesse as our Fryer impudently affirmeth But wisemen may and will beleeue him at leasure seeing hee referreth them for the proofe to his inuisible Booke The dolefull Knell For I protest to all the world that I can neither see it nor find out any man who hath seene that same Booke And therefore I haue great reason to thinke that no such Booke is extant in deed especially because the Iesuites haue long sithence and many times affirmed both in wordes and writinges that my Motiues and Suruay were answered which for all that was such a notorious lye as the sayd Bookes remayne to this day vnanswered insomuch as some of their dearest and most deuoted vassals are ashamed of their sylence in that behalfe and beginne to stagger and to doubt of the Popish Fayth and Religion My Motiues were printed in the yeare 1593. And my Suruay of Poperie in the yeare 1596. So as the Jesuites haue had the former in their handes now 15. yeares fully compleate and the latter 12. yeares with the vantage of a large assisse But more of this subiect in the 9. Chapter following God willing toward the end of the same Thirdly that our Fryers two Witnesses Guide and Cussordius are in honestie and credite comparable to himselfe base fellowes men of no reputation Knightes of the Post who will say or sweare any thing for the Popes pleasure Fourthly that where our Fryer sayth without
God Wherefore he requireth Gods Promise to be added to mans Merite as Aquinas Durandus and Angles had done before him In one place he hath these expresse wordes At vt bono operi debeatur merces ex iustitia conuentio vel promissio necessaria est Non enim tenetur vnus alterius obsequium acceptare nisi conuentio interuenerit Deus autem non promisit mercedem vitae aeternae nisi per Christi gratiam regeneratis et adoptatis But that reward be due of iustice to good Workes a couenant or promise is necessarie For one is not bound to accept the seruice of another vnlesse there be a couenant But God promised not the reward of eternall life saue onely to the regenerate through the grace of God In an other place he hath these words Sed facilis est responsio Nam dicitur Deus reddere debita nulli debens quia nihil vlli debet absolutè sed solum ex promissione dono suo Pari ratione dicimus Deo reade quia promisisti non dicimus redde quia accepisti quoniam fundamentum primum debiti diuini non in opere nostro sed in eius promissione consistit But the answere is easie For God is said to pay debts though he be debtor to none because he oweth nothing to any absolutely but onely in respect of his promise and free gift In like manner wee say to God giue because thou hast promised We say not giue because thou hast receiued Because the chiefe foundation of Gods debt doth not consist in our worke but in his Promise freely made vnto vs. In an other place he hath these wordes Primum igitur opera iustorum remoto pacto vel promissione non esse meritoria vitae aeternae ex condigno siue ex iustitia ita vt non possit Deus sine iniustitia talē negare mercedem satis probatum est scriptura siquidem patres vbicunque dicunt Deum fidelem esse iustum in reddendo praemio semper aut ferè semper mentionem faciunt promissionis First it is prooued sufficiently that the workes of the iust Gods couenant and promise set apart are not meritorious of eternall life condignely and iustly so as God can not deny such reward without iniustice For the Scripture and the fathers whensoeuer they say God is faithfull and iust in rendring reward do euer or almost euer make mention of his promise Thus writeth Cardinal Bellarmine that famous Iesuited Fryer Out of whose doctrine I obserue many worthy Lessons to the confusion of the Pope and all his Popish vassals First that Gods promise is so necessarie to attaine reward that without it no reward can iustly be required Secondly that no reward is due to any but onely to the regenerate Thirdly that the reward is not promised for any merit in mans worke but for Christs sake and merit Fourthly that man can require nothing of God absolutely but onely for his couenant and promise sake Fiftly that God is no mans debtour absolutely but onely by reason of his free gift and promise made to man Sixtly that the chiefe foundation of Gods debt consisteth in Gods free gift and promise made to man Seuenthly that the workes of the best liuers doe not merit eternall life iustly and condignely but onely by reason of Gods couenant and promise Eightly that both the Scripture and the Fathers do either euer or almost euer make mention of gods promise wheresoeuer they tell vs that God is faithfull and iust in rewarding mans workes Much more I could say out of Bellarmine but this is sufficient to euery indifferent Reader The 12. Conclusion Condigne merite of Workes was not an Article of popish faith for more then a thousand fiue hundred and fourtie yeares after Christ. And consequently it must needs bee a rotten ragge of the new Religion as which was hatched so long after the old Roman Catholique Apostolike religion The proofe of this Conclusion is at hand because the late popish Councell of Trent made it an Article of popish Faith accursing condemning to hell all such as deny or not beleeue the condigne merit of mans works The Iesuit S. R. in his pretensed answere to the Downfall of Poperie had no other shift in the world to saue the credite of their Councel and as it were to hide the nakednesse of that vnchristian and plaine diabolical course but to denie the councel to haue decreed cōdigne merite to be an Article of Popish faith For saith hee the Councell hath no word of condigne merit but onely of true merit And after he hath cited the words of the Councell he addeth these of his owne Here are good works defined to be true merite of Glory without determining whether they be condigne merite thereof or no. Thus saith our Iesuite shewing himselfe to be either too too malicious or else a very noddie For to merite truely and condignely is all one Otherwise our Iesuite must tell vs which is vnpossible to be done how one can merite a thing truely and for all that not worthily and condignely deserue the same Well we haue it freely granted because it can not be denied that the Councell of Trent defined true merite but not condigne merite of workes to bee an Article of popish faith And consequently the Iesuite must volens nolens confesse that the Councell defined condigne merit vnder the name of true merite For better confirmation whereof I will adde a testimonie that woundeth the Iesuite at the heart and is indeed incurable It is the Iesuites owne sword which he hath put into my hands to kil him as one wearie of his life because Poperie is prooued the new Religion These are his owne expresse words I neither adde nor take any word syllable or iote away as I desire to be saued Because as I thinke saith our Iesuit onely condigne merite is true merite O sweete Iesus O heauen O earth O all Saints in heauen and all creatures on earth be ye this day iudges betweene the Iesuites and mee The Iesuite denieth the Councell to define condigne merite but graunteth it to define true merite This done O wonderment of the world the same Iesuite within two leaues next following as a madde man bereeued of his wits and senses constantly affirmeth onely condigne merit to be true merit but doubtles if onely condigne merit marke well my words for Christs sake be true merite as the Iesuite truely writeth against himselfe his Pope and Councell and withall if the Councell defined true merit as the Iesuite likewise truely granteth and my selfe affirme it followeth of necessitie that the same Councell defined condigne merit equiualently and Poperie to be the new Religion The truth Gods name be blessed for it must needes in time preuaile now sir Fryer let vs heare your goodly sermon B. C. Bell denieth the Fathers to haue ascribed any Merite to Good workes proceeding from Grace for any dignitie or
the Apostles which Pope Zepherinus and Pope Leo the ninth haue approoued no mention is made of Lent Secondly because S. Clement whoÌ„ S. Peter a litle before his death chose to be his successour at Rome if Popish writinges be true publishing eight whole Bookes of Apostolicall Constitutions doth not in any place so much as once make any mention of the Quadragesimall fast or Lent as it is hath bin kept in Rome of the late Byshops there and their Popish vassals Thirdly because the first foure auncient and approoued generall Councels doe not once name the sayd Quadragesimall fast Fourthly because th'Apostles setting downe a law how to keepe Easter say nothing at all of keeping the Lenton-fast Fiftly because the Apostles haue made a flat Law against the Fast of euery Saturday one onely excepted which was the day of Christs sacred Funerall These are the wordes of S. Clement so supposed Sabbathum et Dominicum diem Festum agite quoniam illud naturae conditae est Monumentum hic resurrectionis Vnum autem Sabbathum seruandum vobis est in toto anno quod pertinet ad Sepulturam Domini in quo iciunare oportet non festum agere Keepe as a holy Feastiuall day the Saturday and the Sunday because the one is the Monument of the Creation th' other of the Resurrection But one Saterday onely ye must keepe in the whole yeare which perteyneth to our Lordes Funerall in which we must Fast and not keepe it Holy-day I answere thirdly that the Popish Lent-fast is very Superstitious plaine Hereticall and too iniurious to the sacred blood of Christ Iesus I prooue it first because they superstitiously absteine from Flesh as did the Heretiques condemned by S. Paul The Papistes Mordicus and impudently deny this but their owne Durand their trustie and faythfull Byshoppe shall confound them these are his expresse wordes Tempore ieiuniorum praetiosae vestes deponuntur et humiles assumuÌ„tur et carnes tam solidae quaÌ„ liquidae dimittuntur Sed cum Pisces sint Caro quare hoc tempore comeduntur Responsio Deus non maledixit Aquis quoniam per Aquam baptismi futura crat remissio peccatorum Hoc enim elementum dignissimum est quod sordes abluit et super quod spiritus Domini ante mundi constitutionem ferebatur Terrae verò maledixit in operibus hominis Inde est quod omne genus carnis quod in terra versatur tam quadrupedia quam Aues in ieiunijs non licet comedere While we Fast costly Garmentes are laide away and base Attyre assumed and Flesh aswell solide as liquide is dismissed But seeing Fish is Flesh wherefore is Fish eaten in Lent I answere that God cursed not the Waters because by the Water of Baptisme we were to receiue remission of our sinnes for this Element is most worthy as which washeth away our filth and vpon which the Spirit of our Lord was carried before the World was made But God cursed the Land in the workes of Man Hence commeth it that euery kind of Flesh liuing on the land aswell foure footed Beastes as Birdes may not be eaten in time of our Lent-fast Thus disputeth our popish Bishop Durand auouching plainely that we may not eate Flesh in Lent because God accursed the fruites of the Earth Which assertion is very Superstitious and plaine Hereticall For aswell may our Jesuite conclude against Bread and Wine in the holy Eucharist vnles he denie them to be the fruites of the Earth Secondly because in their holy Lent-fast sayth their so supposed S. Clement they must pray for the damned which doubtlesse is a damnable Heresie These are his expresse wordes Ieiunantes in ea omnes cum timore et tremore crantes per eos dies pro ijs qui pereunt All fast Lent with feare and trembling praying all those dayes for them that perish This hath a stronge taste of the Originall Heresie that the Diuels shal be saued at the latter day Thirdly because the Papistes beleeue teach that their popish Lent-fast doth merit remission of sinnes increase of grace and eternall glory this is plainely and soundly prooued in my Suruey of Popery Yea the Popish Byshoppe Durand resolutely affirmeth the very same in these expresse wordes Est autem ieiunium communis omniuÌ„ membrorum satisfactio vt scibect membra satisfaciant secunduÌ„ peccatum quod commiserunt vel gesserunt vt si gula peccauit â—eâ—unet et sufficit Fasting is the common satisfaction of all our members so to weete as our members may make satisfaction according to the sinne which they haue done As if any haue sinned in Gluttony let him fast and it is sufficient Which is confirmed by that Popish Fast which they call the Fast of Compassion Thus the same Durandus doth deliuer it Ieiunium compassionis est vt si Sacerdos alicui dicat pro hoc peccato fac cantare duas missas et ieiuna et ego pro te cantabo et tres dies ieiunabo Propter hoc tamen debet aliquid recipere quia Sacerdos debet compati proximo suo et orare pro eo There is a Popish Fast of compassion as if the Priest say to one Cause some Priest to sing two Masses for this sinne and fast and I my selfe shall sing for thee and I shall also fast three dayes for thee Marry for this compassion the Priest must haue some thing because he must haue compassion on his Neighbour and pray for him Heere is a merriment of merry Poperie in very deed The Priest so taketh compassion on his penitent that he maketh him relieue his need This compassion is coosen germane to the Iesuites Exercise of which I haue written at large in my Anatomy of popish Tyranny by which while they pretend to send their supplyantes to heauen they get all their Lands Goods and Money to them selues Iohn Gerard caused Henry Drurie to enter into their Iesuiticall Exercise and thereby got him to sell the Mannor of Lozell in Suffolke and other Landes to the value of 3500. poundes and got all the money himselfe The same Gerard by the same Exercise got from Anthony Rowse aboue a thousand poundes from Edward Walpoole whom he caused to sell the Mannor of Tuddenham about one 1000. Markes from Iames Linacre 400. pounds from Edward Huddlestones aboue 1000. poundes Much more like stuffe the Reader may find in mine Anatomie which I passe ouer for breuitie sake This Jesuiticall Exercise hath no smal semblance with the siluer Temples of Diana which being made by Demetrius brought great gaines to the Craftes-men there I answere fourthly that to make choyse of Meates for Merite or Religion is the badge of an Infidell I prooue it first because by meanes hereof many haue beleeued false doctrine to be the word of God not onely so but they haue also iudged and condemned them-selues for transgressing mans Traditions as if they
hath bestowed almost one whole Leafe of Paper in the recitall of my wordes Transeat It is impertinent B. C. If he inferre against our Ceremonies as he doth because they were instituted since Christ though very auncient That they be rotten rags of the New religion What shall become of their Ceremonies which either be borrowed from vs or of farre latter date What can they be else but pil◠patches of Protestanisme rusty Ragges of the Reformed congregation Nay what must their Communion Booke it selfe be neuer heard of in the whole world till the late dayes of King Edward the sixt and drawen from our Portesse and Masse-bookes as the thing it selfe speaketh and their Geneua Ghospellers often cast in their teeth T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite vnawares giueth Poperie a deadly wound while he maketh popish Masse and the Oath which popish Byshoppes make to the Pope to be no weighty poyntes of Religion For they are within the compasse of the eleuen Chapters of which he writeth in this manner These Chapters I shall soone dispatch seeing they concerne not any weighty poyntes of Religion but Ceremonies and such like Secondly that seeing by Popish free graunt neither popish Masse nor the popish Oath be matters of any weight to which I for my part willingly agree it followeth of necessitie that the Pope is a most cruell Tyrant while he suffereth no Byshoppes to haue voyces in Councels but such as take that wofull Oath As also while he burneth with Fire and Faggot all such as will not adore the popish Bread-god in the Idolatrous popish Masse Thirdly that our Fryer Jesuite is still like himselfe that is a most notorious lyer while he chargeth me to tearme all Ceremonies instituted since Christ though very auncient to be rotten Ragges of the New religion For I am so farre and so free from this false and plaine Diabolicall accusation as I approoue all Ceremonies consonant to Gods word at what time soeuer the Church did institute the same None that shall duely peruse my Regiment of the Church can be ignorant hereof Nay I say further that the Jesuite is not able to bring any one sentence out of any one of all my Bookes which denyeth Authoritie to the Church to institute new Ceremonies at any time so the same be consonant to Gods word and profitable for the circumstaunces of time place and persons Yea the Iesuite confesseth within twentie lines before this false and heynous slaunder that this is the very doctrine which I teach But his witte is so besotted in fighting and bickering against the manifest trueth that he forgetteth what he writeth so soone as a new reason pricketh him for he had rather heape lyes vpon lyes and slaunders vpon slaunders then forsake and condemne their gainefull Poperie which is to him and his fellowes as was the Temple of Diana to Demetrius and the other Craftes-men Fourthly that we vse no Ceremonies in our English Church but such as are both agreeable to the holy Scriptures and of farre greater antiquitie then the time of Poperie which I oppugne Albeit I doe not absolutely condemne all Ceremonies this day vsed in the Romish Church but respectiuely as they are superstitiously vsed and too vnlawfull or at least ridiculous or vnprofitable endes For I willingly graunt that sundry Ceremonies now vsed in the Romish Church are thinges indifferent of their owne nature and that the same were not to be condemned if the superstitious abuse and wicked intentes for which they are done were wholly remooued from them Where I wish the Reader to marke attentiuely these my words Absolutely Respectiuely Fiftly that in our Communion Booke two thinges must distinctly be obserued and Christianly distinguished viz. the Essentiall and the Accidentall partes thereof Touching the partes Essentiall they are all and euery of them as old as is the written Word of God it selfe The Aduersaries are not able to giue any true instance against the same Touching the partes Accidentall they are all in like manner old in the thing it selfe though of later date in the modification of the thing Thus in playner tearmes All the accidentall partes of our English Communion booke if we respect the matter it selfe conteined therein are as old as the holy Scripture it selfe though of farre latter date if we respect the order and disposition of the same This my Answere is grounded vpon this doctrine of S. Paul Omnia ad aedificationem fiant Omnia honestè et secundum ordinem fiant in vobis Let all thinges be done to edifying Let all thinges be done decently and according to order Sixtly that our Communion booke is drawne from the holy Scriptures as is already prooued and from the old Romane Missals or Communion-bookes in the Purer age of the Church long before the time of idolatrous and superstitious Poperie which I in all my Bookes oppugne B. C. More then foure hundred yeares before the time of S. Gregorie the auncient Brytaines receiued the same manner of seruing God from the blessed Pope and Martyr S. Eleutherius that is in the Latin tongue Which appeareth first because venerable Bede reporteth that there was not any materiall difference betwixt S. Austen sent by S. Gregorie and the Brytaine Byshops saue onely in Baptisme and the obseruation of Easter Secondly for that certaine it is that they had also since S. Austens time the Masse in the Latin tongue But to thinke that if they had been once in possession of the seruice in their owne vulgar Language that they could haue been brought from that without infinite garboyles especially the opposition betwixt them and the English Saxons in auncient time considered or that if any such contention had fallen out that it could haue been omitted by the curious Pennes of our Historiographers it were great simplicitie once to surmise Wherefore what followeth but that they receiued that custome at their first conuersion which was within lesse then two hundred yeares after Christ And consequently that by Bels allowance and the common Computation of others it is sound Catholique and Apostolicall and not any Rotten ragge of a New religion as this Ragge-maister gableth And that on the contrary to haue the publique Seruice in the vulgar tongue is a New patch of Protestanisme fetched from Wittenberge or that Mart of Martinistes the holy City of Geneua T. B. I answere first that I haue prooued already in the sixteene Chapter aforegoing that in the primatiue and auncient Church the publique Prayers and diuine Seruice were euery where in the vulgar Tongue Secondly that the Latin tongue was then vulgar to all the Nations of Italy Spaine Germanie France Africa and other Countries of the West For in those dayes the Latin tongue was commonly spoken and vnderstood wheresoeuer the diuine Seruice was in Latine Which is plaine and euident by S. Austens Doctrine in many places of his workes Thirdly that if the
Brytaines did at their conuersion receiue the Latine Seruice first by Eleutherius about the yeare 179. after Christ and againe by Gregorie about the 596. yeare yet can no more be truely inferred therevpon if we graunt the Latine tongue to haue been then decayed in Brytaine same onely that the Romanes deliuered their Church-seruice in the Latine tongue which then was their vulgar Language being altogeather ignoraunt of the Brytaine tongue and that the Brytaine for the loue they bore to the publique Prayers and Church-seruice which they receiued at their conuersion to the Christian faith did euer after vse and retaine the same in the Latine tongue in which they first receiued it Fourthly that seeing by Christes commandement deliuered by his Apostle All thinges in the Church ought to be done to edification it followeth of necessitie that the Latine vsage of the Brytaines in diuine Seruice was a Ragge of a New religion as which was about 179. yeares younger then the old and repugnant to Apostolicall doctrine For S. Paul spendeth no lesse then one whole Chapter that only to prooue that euery Nation ought to haue their Church-seruice in their vulgar knowne tongue If the Trumpet sayth he giue an vncertaine sound who shall prepare him selfe to the Warre So likewise you except ye vtter by the tongue manifest speech how shall it be knowne what is spâ—ken for ye shall speake in the ayre Againe thus If I know not the meaning of the voyce I shall be to him that speaketh an Aliant and he that speaketh shall be an Aliant to mee Againe thus Wherefore let him that speaketh with the tongue pray that he may interpret For if I pray with the tongue my spirit prayeth but my vnderstanding is without fruite Where I wish the Reader to obserue with me that the Spirit in this place is taken for the spirituall gift of Tongues as S. Chrysostome vpon this place doth witnesse S. â—heophilact is consonant to S. Chrysostome He calleth the Gift the Spirit sayth Theodorus My Spirit prayeth that is my spirituall Gift to speake with Tongues sayth Phoâ—us Againe thus If thou blesse with the Spirit how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at the giuing of thankes seeing he vnderstandeth not what thou sayeth Againe thus I had rather speake fiue wordes with my vnderstanding in the Church that J may instruct others then ten thousand wordes in an vnknowen tongue Againe thus Let all things be done to edification Fourthly that our Jesuite gableth as a lying pratler while he impudently auoucheth that by Bels allowance the Latine vse in Church-seruice where the people vnderstand it not is found Catholique and Apostolicall For Bell hath plainely prooued it to be vnsound Prophane and Diabolicall as also that the vse of publique Seruice in the vulgar Tongue came neither from Wittenberge nor Geneua But from the Primitiue Apostolicall and succeding Churches for many hundred yeares togeather Whosoeuer shall with a single eye and sound iudgement peruse the Sixteene chapter afore-going and ioyne my Suruey with it can not but cleerely behold as in a Glasse of Christall the trueth to be as I haue written Lyranus a famous and great learned Papist in his learned Commentaries vpon S. Pauls Epistles doth so plainely so constantly affirme that in the Primatiue Church the publique Prayers and all other thinges were in the vulgar Tongue as none that shall read him seriously can possibly stand in doubt thereof Yea S. Basil auoucheth expressely that the Egyptians the Lybians the Thebanes the Palestines the Arabians the Phaenicians the Syrians and generally all Christian Nations of what Language soeuer they were had their common Prayers and Seruice in their vulgar Tongue But our Rhemishes obiect S. Pauls words against S. Paul in this manner Also when a man prayeth in a strange Tongue which himselfe vnderstandeth not it is not so fruitfull for instruction to him as it be knâ—w particularly what he prayed Neuerthelesse the Apostle forbiddeth not such praying neither confessing that his spirit heart and affection prayeth well towardes God though his minde and vnderstanding be not profited to instruction as otherwise it might haue been if he vnderstood the wordes Neither yet doth he appoynt such a one to get his strange Prayers translated into his vulgar Tongue to obtaine thereby the aforesaid instruction To this I answere first that I haue alreadie prooued out of S. Chrysostome and other Fathers Theodoretus Theophilactus and Photius that S. Paul doth not vnderstand by the word Spirit the Heart and Affection but the Spirituall gift to speake with Tongues Secondly that it is cleare by many textes of the Apostle that the word Spirit doth so signifie as I haue sayd Thirdly that if we should graunt the Spirit to signifie Heart and Affection as the Rhemistes absurdly expound it yet could not that serue their turne because S. Paul willeth to pray not onely with Spirit but also with minde and vnderstanding As also for that S. Paul in an other text commaundeth expressely That all thinges â—e done in the Church to edifying Which is no other Doctrine indeed then Christ himselfe teacheth in his holy Ghospell This people saith he draweth neere vnto me with their mouth and honoureth me with the lippes but their heart is farre from me Fourthly that the Apostle commaundeth him that hath the gift of Tongues to pray that he may interpret his strange tongue himselfe or that some other should interpret it or else to keepe silence in the Church For this cause doth S. Chrysostome constantly affirme that Prayers not vnderstood of him that vttereth them are altogeather vnprofitable Thou seest sayth he how by litle and litle he is come to this poynt that he declareth him to be vnprofitable not onely to others but also to him selfe seeing the minde of such a man is voyde of fruite For if a man speake onely in the Persians Language or in any other strange Tongue and doe not vnderstand those things which he speaketh he shall be to himselfe as he that vnderstandeth not the meaning of the voyce This and much more to the like effect sayth S. Chrysostome of those that had the gifts of Tongues and vnderstood not what they spake What thinke you sir Fryer would he haue sayd if he had heard the vnlearned Papistes babling on their Beades and Primers what they did not vnderstand Nay if he had heard that which now adayes is very frequent among the vnlearned Papistes both men and women how they choppe and change clippe and mangle the wordes so as they either haue a contrarie or ridiculous sense or else plaine none at all but stand as Cyphers and Voces non significatiuae For this is a truth so well knowne as it can not without blushing be denied that many popish Priestes haue been so ignoraunt that they neither vnderstood their Portesses
nor their Missals nor their Absolutions no nor yet the wordes of Baptisme Hence sprang this curious question euen among the Popish Schoole-men viz. If the Child were truely Baptized when the ignoraunt Baptizer did vtter the words in this manner Ego to baptizo in nomine Patria et Filia et Spiritui Sancta In briefe the Popish Councell of Lateran vnder Pope Innocentius the third decreed flatly strictly commaunded all Byshoppes who within their iurisdictions had Nations of diuers Tongues Rites and Manners vnder one Fayth to prouide meete men to celebrate diuine Seruice vnto them according to the diuersitie of their Rites and Languages By which Popish Decree it is cleare and euident that foure hundred yeares are not yet expired since the Pope approoued publique Seruice in all vulgar Languages B. C. The Minister very profoundly scoffeth both at other partes of the Masse and also at these following writing thus Gregorie added the Kyrie eleyson Telesphorus Gloria in excelsis Deo Gelasius the Collectes Hieronymus the Epistle and Ghospell The Creede was receiued of the Nicene Councell Pope Sergius the Agnus Dei. After this he concludeth both of these and others which he there mentioneth as the Introite Halleluia the Commemoration of the Dead Incense and the Pax in this maner This being so I can not but conclude that euery patch peece of the Romish Fayth is but a Rotten ragge of the New religion So earnest he is to make euery peece of the Masse a Rotten ragge that he hath also made many partes of their owne Communion-booke Patches and Peeces and Rotten ragges In which Kyrie eleyson Gloria in excelsis the Collectes Epistle and Ghospell Nicene Creede and Agnus Dei be found no lesse then in our Masse-bookes T. B. I answere first that some of the Patches of the Popish Masse heeâ—e recited are Hereticall some Superstitious some Ridiculous as I haue else-where prooued at large Secondly that the Kyrie eleyson the Epistle and Gholpell Gloria in excelsis Nicene Creede Agnus Dei and the Collects which our Church vseth are all wholly conteyned in the holy Scriptures and consequently they are damnable in the Popish Church though commendable in ours For we finding them in holy Writte vse them according to S. Paules rule in that behalfe But the Papists prophane them many wayes First because they prohibite their vse in all vulgar Tongues Secondly because they teach the people erroneous Doctrine labouring to perswade them euery where that they may not haue their publique Prayers and Seruice in their knowne vulgar Tongues Thirdly because they abuse them superstitiously many wayes For they must say the Epistle in one corner of the Alter the Ghospell in the other the Creed in the middest and so foorth The rest they may learne of Byshoppe Durand the Patrone of all Popish Superstition To which I adde for a superstitious merriment That neither the Layicall people nor yet their Popish Deacons in their deuout Prayers may for ten thousand pounds once say and pronounce these words Dominus vobiscuÌ„ The words doe signifie The Lord be with you And for al that the Pope being as Superstitious as Superstition it selfe doth strictly forbid all Deacons to pronouÌ„ce the said words vntil they be made popish Priests This in briefe is my answere viz. that Kyrie eleyson Gloria in excelsis Agnus Dei the Epistles and Ghospels with the Nicene Creede and Collectes are all lawfully vsed in our Church but most shamefully abused in the Popish Church They are most Christian and commendable as they are in them selues absolutely considered but yet most damnable while they are superstitiously abused and against Gods Commaundement by his Apostle giuen vs which strictly requireth all thinges in the Church-seruice to be done to the peoples edification B. C. I omit heere how falsely and blaspheamously he concludeth euery peece of the Masse to be Rotten ragges For are the wordes of Consecration the most essentiall part thereof which came not from any man but from the institution of Christ himselfe as also the Pater noster Rotten ragges Who durst say it but sir Thomas T. B. I answere first that I haue alreadie concluded not falsely but truely not blaspheamously but Christianly that euery patch and peece of Popish Masse as Popish Masse marke well this reduplication is a Rotten ragge of the New Religion Secondly that the wordes of Popish Consecration are but onely fiue in number one of which for all that came from pure Man or rather from the impure Deuill of Hell For who but the Deuill himselfe durst insert among Christes most sacred wordes a word of his owne inuention especially in a matter of so great weight consequence It is a common maxiome receiued of all Diuines generally aswell of Papistes as of others that no inferiour hath power ouer the Law of his superiour And consequently that the Pope hath no power to adde diminish choppe or change any word of Christes sacred Institution vnlesse he either be God or at least equall with him Thirdly that the holy words This is my body came not from Christ as they are a part of the late Romish Masse I proue it soundly Because our Sauiour Christ did not vtter them vntill he had blessed and consecrated the Bread For doubtlesse if it be true as it is most true because the Trueth it selfe hath spoken it that Christ had blessed and consecrated the Bread before he vttered the same wordes it followeth of necessitie it cannot be denied that they are not the wordes of Consecration as the Papistes grossely and fondly doe imagine For in Christes holy Institution many thinges went before the wordes of Popish supposed Consecration First he tooke the Bread Secondly he blessed it Thirdly he brake it Fourthly he gaue it to his Disciples Fiftly he commaunded them to take and to eate it All which being done in order he vttered the Popish so supposed Consecration wordes So then seeing in that Masse which Christ instituted for I receyue aswell the word Masse with the Latine Fathers as the word Liturgie with the Greeke Doctors in their true sense and meaning these wordes Hoc est corpus meum were not the wordes of Consecration it followeth by a consequence ineuitable that the popish Masse in which they are made the wordes of Consecration is a false forged Masse and the New religion in very deed This Doctrine thus deliuered may be confirmed many wayes First because the best learned Papists are at their wittes end and put to their best last trumpe what they shal thinke say or write of the effectiue words of popish Consecration For the famous popish Byshop and great learned Doctor Josephus Angles euen in that Booke which he dedicated to the Pope him selfe relateth foure seuerall popish opinions concerning this present Subiect These are his wordes borrowed of Alexander and Aquinas Prima est Innocentij asserentis per
potestatem excellentiae quam Christus alligatam sacramentis minimè habebat panem in suum corpus conuertisse deinde verò dedisse illud Apostolis dicendo hoc est c. Secunda opinio affirmat consecrasse quibusdam verbis nobis ignotis quando benedixit panem et non quando dixit hoc est c. Tertia opinio tuetur illa forma Christum consecrasse verum occultè scilicet quando benedixit panem deinde publicè illa vsum fuisse vt alios formam consecrandi doceret Quarta opinio tenet quando verba haec hoc est c. protulit simulque factam fuisse benedictionem Pope Innocentius holdeth the first opinion that Christ by the power of excellencie which in him was not tied to the Sacraments conuerted the Bread into his body and then gaue it to his Apostles saying This is my Body c. The second OpinioÌ„ holdeth that Christ Consecrated the Bread with certaine words to vs vnknowen when he blessed the Bread not when he sayd This is my Body The third Opinion affirmeth that Christ did Consecrate with that forme of Wordes but secretly when he blessed the Bread and after vsed the same forme of wordes to instruct others The fourth OpinioÌ„ holdeth that Christ did Consecrate when he spake these wordes This is my Body and that the blessing was done at the same time Behold here the mistery of profound Popish diuinitie I would not pittie his case who being in the middest of a great Fire would not come out to heare it But I pittie the case of silly ignoraunt Papistes who hazard aduenture their saluation in beleeuing such a fond and vncertaine Religion Secondly because by popish Religion when the Priest holdeth the Host ouer his head then the silly Papistes must adore the same as the euerliuing God And for all that euen by popish Fayth and Doctrine the popish so tearmed Host may onely be a peece of meere Bakers bread I prooue it sundry wayes First because Sotus that great learned popish Schoole-man surnamed for his deepe Learning Doctor Subtilis holdeth and constantly defendeth that it is vncertaine whether the Bread be transubstantiated into Christes body or no by these wordes of popish Consecration This is my Body Secondly because by popish Fayth the Bread is not made Christes body vnlesse the Priest haue intention so to make it But doubtlesse sundry cases and causes may fall out to take away the Priestes intention and so the silly people shall commit Idolatrie while they adore a peece of Bread for the lyuing GOD. Thirdly because Caietanus that famous Cardinall and learned popish Schoole-doctor affirmeth resolutely and boldly that no Text in the whole Ghospell prooueth effectually that these wordes This is my Body must be vnderstoode properly But doubtlesse if this be true which the learned Cardinall of Rome auoucheth to be most true the silly Papists must perforce be Idolaters while they adore the popish Host in the popish Masse And therfore doth the popish Byshop Angles giue his Reader this graue aduise Cautâ— legendum esse Caietanum Caietane must be read warily For indeed by Caietanes opinion the adoring of the popish Bread-god is flat Idolatrie Fourthly because in the consecration of the Wine the Priest as Josephus Angles telleth vs may haue Perueâ—sam intentionem a peruerse intention and so not consecrate at all For the Papistes agree about their Reall presence in their popish Masse like Dogges girning and fighting for a Bone albeit it be the most essentiall part of their Masse and consequently of all popish Religion Fiftly because they haue added one word of their owne forge and inuention to the words of Christes sacred Institution to weet the word enim which signifieth for S. Mathew S. Marke S. Luke and S. Paul haue all foure deliuered the expresse wordes of Christes sacred Institution and for all that not one of them doth so much as once name the word enim Fourthly that albeit there be some apparant colour of trueth in that which our Iesuite saith of the Pater noster yet will the same after due examination thereof tende wholly to the confusion of the Pope and all his popish Vassals I therefore answere that though the Pater noster in it selfe and according to Christes Institution be most holy pure and religious yet is the same by superstitious abuse in popish Masse become morally prophane impure and irreligious I prooue it by three seuerall and irrefragable reasons First because in the popish Masse it is mangled maimed and bereaued of a chiefe part of the integritie thereof For as hee that clippeth the Kinges Coyne is thereby a Traytor to an earthly King euen so hee that clippeth or curtalleth Gods sacred Word is thereby a Traytor to God the King of Heauen And consequently seeing the Pope in his idolatrous Masse hath curtalled the Pater noster taking from God his Kingdome his Power and his Glorie which three are plainely comprised in that originall Pater noster which Christ did institute it followeth by an ineuitable illation and necessarie consequence that the Pater noster as it is prophaned in the popish Masse is become a Ragge of the New religion Secondly because in the popish Masse it is vsed in a Tongue to the people vnknowne contrary to Apostolicall doctrine Thirdly because the Pater noster in the popish Masse marke well my wordes is made as it were a slaue to Satan and to serue Idolatrie euen against the euerliuing God to waite and attend vpon the popish Bread-God And so the Pater noster which afore was pure and Euangelicall is now by popish Superstition become impure and Diabolicall But some will here demaund how the Pater noster doth serue Idolatrie To whom I answere that euery thing in popish Masse is meere accidentall as the Jesuite hath freely graunted the popish Reall presence onely excepted to weet the popish so supposed Dagon or Bread-god And consequently al the rest in popish Masse must perforce be designed for the furtheraunce honour and seruice of the said popish Dagon or Bread-god Which seruice I haue elsewhere soundly prooued and plainely conuinced to be very flatte Idolatrie Neither ought this to seeme strange to the Reader for as holy Wordes in Coniurations Theftes Robberies Treasons and the like are by the abuse prophaned and morally become vnholy euen so the holy wordes of the Pater noster are in the popish Masse prophaned and become vnholy They are referred to a wicked and idolatrous end from whence all morall actes receiue their specification as all learned Papistes graunt But the euerliuing God is and ought to be the end of all and consequently whatsoeuer is referred to any other end the same is thereby prophaned ipso facto B. C. The Protestantes obiect how we make the Masse the Sacrifice of the New testament to haue been ordayned by Christ himselfe when as Durandus and others note at what
Platina Carranza Sigeberius Nanclerus Marke well the answere Petr. Dam. Mar. Polonus The Buffaloes are Beastes as terrible as Lyons Many yet liuing know this to be most true The Iesuit Alphonsus was then the Maister of the English Colledge A thing neuer heard nor knowne before Iohn 4 v. 24. 1. Iohn 5. v. 14. Sap. 8.1 Ephes. 1. v. 4.11 Rom. 9. v. 11.15.16 c. Ephes. 6.12 Act. 9. v. 1.2.3 c. Act. 8. v. 1.3 See the Anatomie for this point and note it well Loe the Fryer confoundeth both himselfe and his Pope The Author with the Church of England defendeth euery iote of the old Romane Religion Three very Memorable pointes See the oath Infra Cap. 27. All must be as the Pope will See the Oath which Bishops make to the Pope infra Cap. 27. The Popes pretended prerogatiues must euer be defended Rhemistes in Act. 15. The Pope can not erre The Pope in the Church say the Iesuites S. R. pag. 281. marke this well When Papists speake of the Church they euer meane the pope The Iesuite cuts the Popes throate Marke well the answere See my Booke of Motiues Cap. 8. The Popish Church holdeth no poynts of fayth Marke well for Christes sake this poynt of doctrine The first Corollarie The second Corollarie All this is meere folly Praecedunt ista in B.C. page 86. Marke this confession The Pope as Pope by Popish graunt can not erre Vnderstand this poynt well for Christes sake See and note well my ChristiaÌ„ Dialogue Chap. 2. Pag 14. Argumentum ad hominem See and note well the 29. the 30. Chapters Christ neuer prayed that the Pope should not erre This DileÌ„ma is insoluble S.R. Pag 315. Pag. 417. Loe we must beleeue his doctrine that is an Heretike See and note my Reply to the 29. Chapt. S. R. in the name of the Pope proclaimeth the Popes fayth and doctrine Inferius Cap. 27. Ioh. 9 3â— 1. Ioh. 5. v. 14. Psal. 18. v. 41. Mich. 3.4 Zach. 7. v. 13. Poperie is the new religion Vixit Aquinas A.D. 1243. For the space of 1240. The Fryer dare not do it for his lugges Loe the Pope as Pope by Popish doctrine can not erre The Iesuite how he is beleeued Luke 22. vers 32. Alas alas Poperie is wounded vnto death S. R. pag. 417. Out vpon Poperie who is able to endure it S. R. pag. 417. The Iesuite is shameles and impudent Alphons lib 3. aduers. haereses prope finem This is wonderfull Bellarmine speaketh against his owne knowledge O childish vanitie A.D. 1538. Marke well for Christes sake if thou loue thine owne soule Alphons lib. 1. cap. 4. aduers haeres Marke well this poynt striketh dead The Iesuites are Gypsies Loe the Pope is wounded at the heart hee can no longer liue A note worthy the remembrance The Iesuite hath deserued the whetstone Iob. 1.8 1. Ioh. 3. v. 12. Gen. 6· v. 9. Luke 1.28 Luke 1.6 Heb. 11. Act. 10. v. 2. Mat. 10. v. 42. Heb. 11. v. 27. Rom. 8. v. 18. Io. de Comb. lib. 5. Theol. ver cap. 11. Rhem. Rom. 8. v. 17. in annotae Heb. 11.6 Mat. 7. v. 18. Rom. 14. v. 23. Mat. 7.17 Aug. de fide ex operib cap. 14. tom 4. Esa. 64.6 Bernard de verb. Esa. Serm. 5. p. 405. Phil. 3.12 1. Cor. 1.30 Bernard vbi super D. 2. Ioh. 3.9 Rom. 6.23 Iac. 3.2 Bernard de grat et lib. Arb. p. 1189 Aug. in Ps. 11â— con 2. in fine Bernar. de aduent Dom. Serm. â— To. 1. See my Suruay pag. 389. 2. Cor. 5. v. 19. Vulgaâ—a editio Marke this poynt well Note the Seuenth Conclusion Mat. 7.19 Ioh. 14. v. 23. Ephes. cap. 1. v. 4. et cap. 2. v. 10. Rom. â— v. 30. Esa. 59.2 Ephes. 2. .v. 3.5 Lyr. in Cap. 6 Matt. See the Conclusion and note it Loe Good workâ— are the way which lead vs to heauen Aquin. p. 1. q. 23. art 3. ad 2. Bellar. To. 3. col 627. et col 628. The foresight of workes no cause of predestination Bellarm. To. 3. Col. 628. Bellarm. To. 3. Col 626. et Col. 628. Workes are not the cause of saluation yet the way by which we must come vnto it I defend the old Romane religion God in his eternall purpose prepared both eternall glory for his elect and the way or meanes to attaine the same Bern. super Cant. Ser. 68. Loe the confession of our vnworthines is our best merite Bern in Canâ—â— ser. 67. Bern. ser. 1. in Annunâ— B.M.V. This testimonie is wonderfull Marke it well The Popish Abbot woundeth the Pope at the very heart Vixit Bernardus A.D. 1110. Marke this well Note this ex iure This reason can not be answeared See and note well the 11. Conclusion Aug. lib. 9. Confess cap. 13. Psal. 143. v. 2. Psal. 130. v. 3. Bern. de adu dom serm 6. tom 1. Bernard in annue B.V. serm 1. No Workes can merite Glory Durand in 2 sent dist 27. q 2. in medio Condigne merite is so farre aboue mans capacitie as no man possiblely can haue it Suruey part 3. cap. 9. Soro de nat et gr lib. 3. cap. 6. pag. 138. Popish satisfaction is impossible Arist. in 8. Ethic. cap. 7. Luke 17. v. 20. Iac 3 v. 2. Aquin. 1.2 q. 114. ar 1. in corp Loe man can not merite any thing condignely or properly There is no proper merite in man Marke vnderstand this poynt aright Angles in 2. sent pag. 103. Loe the Papistes graunt as much as we desire Philip. 3.9 Rom. 10.4 Tit. 3.5 1. Cor. 1.30 2. Cor. 5.19 Rom. 8. v. 1 2.3.4 Rom. 5. v. 14. Reu. 7. v. 14. Reu. 3. v. 4. All this is already proued Marke the Cardinals wordes wel vnderstand them soundly Bellar. de iustif tom 3. col 1296. ct col 1298. All the good deedes we can possibly doe are Gods owne and so we can merite nothing of God with them Marke well for Christes sake for Poperie bleedeth vnto death Aug. lib. 9. Confess cap. 13. Marke this well Secundò principaliter Angles in 2. sent pag. 107. The Byshoppe confuteth him selfe he needeth no aduersarie A very fond distinction inuented without rime or reason Tit. 1. v. 2. Heb. 6.10 2. Tim. 4.8 Iac. 1.12 Iac. 2.5 Psal. 130.3 Psal. 143.2 S. R. pag. 257. Note well the eleuenth Conclusion following 1. Cor. 13. v. 13. Heb. 11. v. 6. Aug. in Epist. IohaÌ„ tract 10. in initio Ioh 6. v. 29. Rom. 3 28. Rom. 5.1 Rom. 10. v. 3.4 Act. 13.39 Phil. 3 9. Fides sumitur dupliciter propriè et sinapliciter seu figuratè et re latiuè By Fayth Christes obedience merites are applyed to vs. By Fayth Christes obedience merites are applyed to vs. Ioh. 3. v. 17. Mar 16 v. 7. Hâ—b 11. v. 7 Bona opera sunt medium sine quo non salutis Supâ—rius concl 4. See the 5. Conclusion and note it Rom. 5.1 1. Cor. 1.3 2. Cor. 4.16 Gal. 6.15 Mat. 7.17 Ioh. 15.12 Ioh. 14. v. 1â—