himselfe to the Virgin Mary If any Man feele himselfe agrieued at the iustice of God seeing God hath deuided his kingdome with her for whereas God hath Iustice and mercy he hath reserued Iustice to himselfe to be exercised in this world as it pleaseth him but Mercy he hath committed to his mother If therefore any man finde himselfe agrieued in the Court of Gods Iustice let him appeale to the Court of mercy of his mother This diuinity was so well relisht in the Romish Church that after he had preacht it he publisht it vnder the Popes owne Patronage and the booke was againe printed within these three yeares but what say the Iesuits to it they testifie that this booke is a learned and godly booke full of goodnesse and piety Fourthly Horatius Tursellinus himselfe a Iesuit of good esteeme amongst them Horatius Turellinus in Hiâ—toria virg lauâ—tanae in prefat writes thus Almighty God hath made the Virgin his mother as farre as he may lawfully partaker of his diuine power and Maiesty Now surely if God haue made her fellow with him of his diuine maiesty lesse maruel if Christ haue made her fellow in the worke of redemption Posseuinus in â—it H. And this booke written by a Iesuit hath publike allowance and is dedicated to Cardinall Aldobrandino Fiftly a great Spanish Doctor and professor of diuinity of his order writes thus Iohn Chriâ—ostomus a visiâ—atione de vertis domine to 2 â—ib 2 cap. 2. We haue often seene and heard of very many who in their extreame dangers haue called vpon Mary and presently were deliuered for oft times safety is sooner obtained by calling vpon the name of Mary then by calling vpoÌ„ the name of Iesus Christ the sonne of God Posseâ—inus â—â— apparatu â—icro lit l And this booke is both dedicated to Pope Clement the 8. receiues publike allowaÌ„ce by the Iesuits his name is Chrisostome as tho he were a golden mouthed speaker but if this be his doctrine that her mediation is as powerfull or rather more then is her sonnes it is pitty but he should be calld and accounted a leaden mouthed wretch By all these many more that as the learned know might easily be produced it may appere that this blaspheming Iesuit Bonarscius in this his detestable comparison of her milk with Christs blood saith no more in effect then others both of his religion perticular sect and therefore it may be iustly concluded this is the doctrine and diuinity not of him alone but of the Iesuits and of the popish Church it selfe as long as it stands approued or vncondemned by them Now then if this be the diuinity of the Romish Church 1. That a Creatures milke may be mingled with Christs blood in the matter merit of our saluation 2. That it helpes and heales spirituall sores of the soule as well as the blood 3. That though no man did yet a woman did help God in the worke of our saluation 4. That the Psalmes may be turned from Lord to Lady 5. That a man may appeale from God to the Virgin Mary 6. That God hath deuided his kingdome with her keeping Iustice to himselfe and surrendring Mercy to her 7. That God hath made her pertaker with himselfe of his diuine power and Maiesty 8. That a mans prayers are often heard rather by and through her then Christ Iesus If these I say be the doctrines of the present Church of Rome then let the Christian world be pleased to obserue 1. How farre the present Romish Church is degenerate from the antient 2. How great cause we and al Churches of God haue to seperate from such a sinagogue 3. How iustly they may be pronounced Antichristian who thus hainously disparage the person and office of the Mediator 4. How vntrue it is that by many is suggested that the present religion of Rome is much reformed refined at this day for it is most certaine in the former times these would haue beene condemned as blasphemies euen in the Romish Church it selfe And lastly you of this most Honorable and reuerend assembly of the church CoÌ„mon-wealth of England may here see what cause there is to pronounce the true Papists Hereticks considering the present Church holds not onely these but many other fundamentall errors both for matter of faith and of gouernement which are perticularized in my Epistle And considering that all meanes haue beene vsed to reclaime and reforme her but all is in vaine for she is that Babilon that will not be healed wherefore it is our duty to forsake her and leaue her to the iust hand of God Thus shall we follow the counsell of the Prophet in the like case who saith we would haue healed Babylon but she vvould not be healed let vs forsake her and goe euery man to his owne Countrey for her Iudgement is come vp to heauen and lifted vp to the cloudes
sinnes of the soule are cleansed and taken away aswell by a creatures milke as by Christ his blood is this the catholike doctrine they brag so much of is this the catholike Church that teacheth such diuinity is this the chaire of S. Peter the seate that cannot erre If it be so then what didst thou meane thou St. Iohn Euangelist to teach that it was Iesus Christ that faithfull witnesse Reuel 1.5 that first begotten from the dead and that Prince of the Kings of the earth euen he and not any creature who hath loued vs and washed vs from our sinnes in his blood sure either must thou recant this doctrine els they that boast themselues to be successors of thy brother Peter may be ashamed of theirs who tell vs that our sins are washt away in her milke as well as by his blood and you that are the dutiful and deuoted children of that Romish sear be Iudges euen your selues in this case what can be said heereunto how can it stand with scripture or with the tenor of true catholike faith or how can it any way be defended that a creatures milke can quench the fire of sinne in the soule as well as Christ his blood Can ye say that heere is onely ascribed to her and her milke a deriued vertue from another and that the original and fundamentall power is onely and wholy in Christ and his blood if it were so it were lesse euill though Christ Iesus may not nor will not bestow the prerogatiues of his Mediatorship on any creature but looke and wade ouer the words againe and again expound them with any fauour that the wordes may beare and you shall not see the least difference Suffocare queo Sanguine Lacte queo Detergere queo Lacte Cruore queo If Lust burne Anger boyle Enuy fret Vaineglory swell I can helpe it with blood so can I with milke I can helpe it with milke so can I with bloud there can be no greater equalitie made betwixt any two thinges in the worlde then here they make betwixt this Bloud and Milke Can it be said that the Author is a Poet and said thus but to make vp the Verse which otherwise wold not haue falne so fitly surely no for a yong versifier can soone shew how the verses might haue run aswell as they do if he had not purposely laboured to sort his verse to his matter and not the matter to the verse For thus he might haue said Detergere queo sanguine Christe tuo with very little alteration And so of the rest but he as truly endeuoured to magnifie the milke as the bloud and therefore without any necessitie of the verse giues the same power place preheminence in euery respect to the milke as to the bloud but had he bene as sound and sincere a Christian as he is a good Poet he might in as good verses haue giuen all the honour to Christ as he deserueth Therefore my deere country-men be no longer seduced by a Religion so fraught with Atheisme blasphemy impyety doe but looke into the Scriptures Counsels or Fathers yea aske the honestest learnedst of your owne religiō or any except Iesuits or such other like them who frame a religiō to their owne purposes If this be tollerable Diuinitye that the Milke of the Virgin doth cleanse mans soule from sinne aswell as Christ his bloud If it be not diuinity but blasphemy no Christian doctrine but impiety and yet suffered yea approued in the Romane Church both by doctrine and practise then returne to that truth and holy religion which out of Gods word and according to the purest antiquity is established amongst vs with heart voice ioyne with vs to imbrace and say Amen to that holy doctrine of blessed St. Iohn who saith it is Iesus Christ that loued vs and washed vs from our sinnes by his blood to him be glory for euer and euer Amen This was his religion this is ours oh that it were yours also he sucked this diuinity out of that blessed brest of Gods sonne whereon he leaned and if he had sucked thence this diuinity of the Iesuits that the virgin Mary washed vs from our sinnes by her milke surely he would neuer haue concealed it from vs nor haue depriued her of the honour nor vs of the comfort that thereby might accrewe both to her and vs for he was her sonne by her owne adoption yea her sonne by the gift and nomination of her sonne and sauiour yea her sonne in loue duty and all respectiuenesse could he then or would he in any sort obscure her due glory would he giue too much to her sonne and too little to her would he giue all that to her sonne which in parte was hers can this may this or dare this be immagined by any Iesuit If not then how dare they extend their deuotion beyond his and ascribe that to her which he neuer did yea that to her which he appropriates to Iesus Christ If they thinke that Peter had more deuotion then Iohn 1. Pet 2.24 hearken then what he saith Iesus Christ his owne selfe bare our sinnes in his body on the tree let the words be pondered Iesus Christ saith he bare our sinnes true say they but so did the virgin Mary also No saith Peter he himselfe his owne selfe bare them yea in his body he bare them in his body say they that is true but he beares them in his mysticall body in his members much more therefore in his mother which is more then many members of his body nay saith St Peter he bare our sinnes his owne selfe in his body but what body euen that body that was on the tree therefore if St Peter preach true diuinity then is this doctrine of your Teachers hainous blasphemy All that may be imagined for their defence at the best is this that all this is but poeticall hyperbolicall or proceedes from the passion height of deuotion but that in truth and earnest he ascribes all to Christ to his blood makes his prayer to him and puts the confidence of his heart in him alone but least any man should haue the least suspition of him this way or thinke so good a thought of him he deales yet more plainely and to preuent all such thoughts and obiections he makes his prayer both to the mother and the sonne without any difference in the world to the one for her milke to the other for his blood for thus he saith Ergo par ens et nate meis ad vertite votis Lac peto depereo sanguinem vtrūque volo That is Mother and Sonne giue eare to what I craue I begge this milke that blood both would haue Heere is plaine dealing it is not the Sonne and his blood that will serue his turne he must also haue the mother and her milke is not this good catholike doctrine and deuotion but further is it not strange to see how he
marshalls them in the order of his iudgement and affection he prayeth to the mother and the sonne but first to the mother hee will haue both milke and blood but first milke thus Mary hath the precedence of Christ and her milke of his blood But you will say it is not that he so esteemes them in his iudgement but onely for the necessitie of the verse the answere is that a grammer scholler can soone shewe how the verse is as good and giue Christ his precedence as it is doing him this wrong Ergo Nate parensque meis aduertite votis But he stil keeping Christ in wardship and vnder age held it not fit that he should haue the place before his mother onely and therefore without all necessitie euen wittingly and wilfully he puts Christ in the second place But now let vs hasten to an end of this if it be not endlesse and bottomelesse impiety Vpon these fearefull premises thus he proceedes Paruule maternis medius qui ludis in vlnis et tua iam comples vbera iam vacuas Quid me respectas obliqua tuētibus hirquis Roboris in Coelum nil habet inuidia Saepe quidem dixti noxis offensus iniquis Tune meas māmas Improbe tune meas Nolo tuas ó nolo tuas puer auree māmas Non sum tam duri tā grauis oris homo sed tātū lateris pluat vnica vnica stilla Et saltem a dextrae vulnere gutta pluat Si nihil è dextrâ visimpluere implue laeuâ Si nihil é laeuâ de pede sanguis eat Si tibi non placeo vulnus mihi vulnera dāto Mercedem danto vulnera si placeo In English thus Youngling that in thy mothers armes art playing Sucking her brest somtimes somtimes staying Why dost thou view me with that look of scorne It s forceles enuie that gainst thee is borne Oft hast thou said being angry at my sinne Darest thou desire the teats my foode lies in I will not oh I dare not noble childe Dutie from me is not so far exilde But one euen one poore drop I doe implore from thy right hand or side I aske no more If neither from thy left hand let one fall nay from thy foote rather then none at all dost thou dislike me let thy wounds me wound But pay my due if I in grace be found Now from blasphemy he proceedes to plain Atheisme not fearing to expose the greatest mysteries of Christian faith and euen our blessed Sauiour himself to the ridiculous scornefull contempt of prophane men Speaking vnto Christ God coaequall with the father and whose very humanity raigneth now in glory at Gods right hand as to a seely infant in his mothers armes and to him whose very humanity is fedde with the gloryous presence and contemplation of the deity as to a poore childe sucking his mothers brests such conceits are common and such words and writings rife with them of our blessed Sauiour who neuer speake of the Virgin Mary but with the title of Queene of heauen Lady of Angels the gate of Paradice the fountaine of mercy or some such other titles fitting none but him that is God or at the least she is alwaies a cōmaunding Mother and he an infant gouerned and an obedient childe But let vs consider his words a little better Paruule c. youngling saith he thou pretty babe that playest in thy mothers armes and sometimes suckes her brestes till they be emptie and againe stayest till they be full c. Is this good and sound Diuinity that Christ our Redeemer is now this present yeare at Halla in Brabant an Infant playing in his Mothers armes sucking her brests If it be so then sure St. Paul was much to blame to teach vs that euen the man Iesus Christ after he had offred one sacrifice for sinnes sitteth for euer not in his mothers armes but at his Fathers right hand and what doing not playing in her armes nor sucking her brests but there he euer liueth to make intercession for vs. Intercession to whome not to her in whose armes they will make him play but to him at whose right hand he sitteth for euermore And much more to blame St Peter who not foreseeing it seemes what doctrine his pretended successor would teach after him teacheth vs that Iesus Christ is at Gods right hand gone into heauen to whome Angelles powers might are subiect Are Angels powers might subiect to him must he be subiect to a mortall humane creature Nay is he now an Infant playing in his mothers armes and hanging on her brests is not this good Catholik Rōish doctrine is not this good pure Romish deuotion to pray to him who is God of glory whose manhood is now at Gods right hand Angels and powers subiect to him in such wordes as these Thou pritty Childe that playest in thy mothers armes hangest at her brests Is this a saluation fit for the Sonne of God who is the Sonne consecrated for euer the heire of all thinges the brightnes of Gods glory and the ingrauen forme of his person or is this a Christian like description of him who hauing by himselfe purged our sinnes fitteth at the right hand of the maiestie in the highest places But this is naturall to Popish religion to disgrace the mediator they care not how so that they may aduaunce some creatures and magnifie their owne deuises but though they neuer so much abuse most of Gods ordinances and nullifie the very Offices of the Mediator Yet me thinks they should be a little feareful how they touch the person it selfe of the mediator and sonne of God and should shrinke and shame to expose the person of Iesus Christ to the base conceit of the vngodly for what can the carnall man much more the Atheist the Turke and the Iewe imagine of Christ when he that is his pretended Vicar suffers his followers to speake and write of him and pray to him as a playing childe and sucking infant and to describe him in his behauiours as a very childe greeuing and crying that any should touch his mothers paps but onely himselfe alas what will this religion of Rome do at last the word of God and Sacraments and other his holy ordinances they haue prophaned the officer of the Mediator haue they nullified and yet not content heere they labour to make rediculous to all irreligious men the very person of Iesus Christ himselfe could this be done by any but them that are the Children of that mother of fornication that sits vpon the beast full of names of blasphemy arise O Lord maintaine thine owne cause deliuer thy holy name from that pollution and thy religion from that contempt which they bring vpon it To conclude it may not be amisse heere to obserue the opposition betwixt God in his holy scripture and the Pope in this his religion 1. Cor. 5.16 The Scrpture saith Christe Iesus is no more to be