wormes to be engendied if it be long kept and that both the kinds are corrupted but it is blasphemous to say that either Christs body and blood are corrupted or that wormes can issue and be engendred thereof to auoid this inconuenience they say they are engendred of the accidents or of the bread and wine returning againe For the engendring of wormes of meere accidents is absurd and for the returne of bread and wine they can bring foorth no words of scripture 29. Thomas Aquinas p. 3 q. 77. art 7. confesseth that Christs body is not broken in the Sacrament and gladlie would he shew how the accidents there may be broken but he traueileth with vanitie and bringeth foorth nothing but foolerie 30. Commonly Masse-Priests say that Christ at his last supper did eat himselfe and drinke his owne blood before it was shed matters that imply manifest contradiction and dissolue rules of reason 31. Now the spaniards will not denie but they are canibals and eaters of mens flesh that eate the same whether rosted broiled baked or otherwise dressed why then should not the Masse-priests be auoided as eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood as they say themselues albeit they eate Christs flesh and drinke his blood prepared vnder other formes 32. The fathers say that Christs bodie is meate for the soule and not to be eaten with the teeth but Nicholas the second will haue it torne with teeth as his words import c. ego Berengarius de consecrat dist 2. others will haue it swallowed into the belly 33. Christians abhorre to heare that Christs bodie should be eaten and his blood drunken of brute beastes but Papists teach and confesse both 34. Christ gaue his disciples the cuppe of the new testament the Pope and his complices sacrilegiously take the same from Gods people 35. Christ said take and cate the Masse-priests suffer them that haue them to gape and gaze and giue them often nothing to eate 36. Christians beleeue that they receiue the same Sacrament that Christs disciples receiued at his last supper but Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 81. art 3. saith the disciples receiued it passible and such as it then was but now no man can receiue his true body but he must receiue it as it is in heauen that is as it is glorified and impassible 37. They say that the eucharist is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice and for those two ends instituted but that implieth a plaine contradiction for as the sacrifice is offred to God so the Sacrament is ordeined and giuen to men 38. If poison after consecration be mingled in the Sacrament Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 83. art 6. will haue the same kept among Saints reliques but what Christian will rescrue poison for a relique 39. The Apostle saith Christ was once offred the Masse-priests say he is offred continually and that for quicke and dead a matter vnknowen to Christs Apostles 40. Our Sauiour instituted this Sacrament for a remembrance of his death and passion but the Masse-priests offer the Sacrifice of his bodie and blood for quicke dead for sicke for hole for sailers for trauellers in the honor of Sainte and Angels for peace and good successe in all things which bee matters neuer thought vpon in the institution of this Sacrament Finallie they haue no lesse strange false and contrary positions in their doctrine of matrimony order penance and extreme vnction which they make Sacraments but by this it may appeare sufficiently how litle they regard either the institution of Christ or the doctrine of the ancient catholicke church in the matter of Sacraments I shall also haue occasion otherwhere to touch these pointes particularlie CHAP. VIII That poperie is a mixture of old and new heresies IT were long to insist vpon euery article of Popish doctrine I will therefore rather in a generality shew the qualities proceedings and practises thereof running through the whole then dilate the absurdities and falsities of euery particular standing vpon euerie small point now then that I haue touched the grounds and certaine principall doctrines of Popery I haue thought good to shew that the rest is nothing but either old or later heresies They glory in their workes and hope to bee iustified by the law as may be gathered out of Bellarmines disputes de iustificatione and also out of diuers of their treatises of good workes the Iebusites of Collein censur fol. 22. say that all their life and saluation consisteth in the precepts of the law whose fulnesse is loue they doe also extoll the merits of their workes but the Apostle Rom. 2. taxeth them that glory in the law and Galat. 3. condemned those false Apostles that taught iustification by the law 2. They make Gods law void by their traditions of worshipping images maintaining publike stewes banks of vsury and such like practises the which is noted as an error in the scribes and pharisies reprobastis mandatum Dei saith our Sauiour Marc. 7. per seniorum vestrorum traditionem and as they had their Talmud so haue the Papists their decrees and decretales which they follow as the law of God 3. The Monks and Iebusites are also like to Pharisies dicebantur pharisaei saith Epiphanius haeres 16. ante Christum co quod separati essent ab alijs propter spontaneam superfluam religionem apud ipsos receptam the Pharisies were so called for that they were separated from others for voluntary and supersluous religion receiued by them they compassed also sea and land to make Proselytes and when they had won them they made them twise more the children of hell then they were themselues as our Sauiour Matth. 23. teacheth vs. so likewise for a spontaneous and superfluous shew of religion these irreligious Iebusites and Monkes do separate themselues from others and take great paines to winne Proselytes to the synagogue of Rome and in the end abuse many and make them much worse than themselues 4. In their supersophisticall exposition of the law and their often washings and affectate holinesse they imitate the scribes who for this cause by Epiphanius haeres 15. ante Christum are enrolled in the catalogue of heretickes 5. By their often washing in holy water the Papists hope to wash awaie sinnes as the Hemerobaptists among the Iewes which for this were reputed heretiks as Epiphanius sheweth haeres 17. ante Christum but there he telleth them that neither drops nor riuers of water nor the whole ocean can wash awaie sinnes 6. The Dositheans were reputed heretickes for their affectation of virginity and abstinence from mariage and punishing their bodies why then should not the like accompt be made of those Papists that runne into the same errors not sparing their bodies more than they did whom the Apostle Coloss 2. reprehendeth 7. Iohn the 23. was condemned in the councell of Constance for denying the immortality of the soule the like opinion as Zegedinus in spec pontif and others report had Alexander the sixth Leo
was summoned by K. Recaredus who by his authority proposed a forme of faith which was allowed by the councell the same also followed the forme of the Easterne church all which the synagogue of Rome now misliketh In the 6. synode the Emperour presided as appeareth by diuers acts of that synode there it was decreed c. 13. that Priests and Deacons should not bee separated from their wiues that none should fast on Sundaies or Saturdaies in Lent that Christ should not be painted in the similitude of a lambe and that the communicants should receiue the sacrament with their hands all which canons condemne the moderne practise of the synagogue of Rome The 2. Nicene councell saith that God is not to bee formed and Act. 7. that the crosse and other images are not to be worshipped with latria which is direct contrary to the doctrine of Papists The councell of Lateran vnder Innocent the third mentioneth onely two sacraments in the chap. Firmiter de sum Trinit fid Cath. there also somewhat is saide of penance but the same is not reckoned there as a sacrament If then later councels make sometime against Papists little are they to hope for proofe of their heresies out of the first ancient councels the popish sacrifice of the bodie and bloud of Christ conteined really in the eucharist the communion vnder one kind transubstantiation the adoration of the sacrament the Popes supreme power in dispensing against lawes or rather in breaking lawes the popish worship of images Angels and Saints and the rest of their heresies shall neuer be prooued out of ancient councels but easilie may they be reprooued by them CHAP. XVIII That Popery is not the faith of the ancient fathers of the Church TO handle this point fully would require a large volume but we will onely alleadge a few arguments for proofe of our assertion referring the Reader for the rest to our larger disputes against the Papists wherein we challenge them that in no one point of faith in controuersie betwixt them and vs they iumpe with the fathers and that may appeare in a generality first for that in most points and that of greatest difference they are destitute of fathers as for example where they go about to proue the booke of Machabees and others not found in Hebrew to bee equall to the bookes of the 4. Euangelists that scriptures are to bee read publickely in a tongue not vnderstood of the hearers that the Latin vulgar translation is more authenticall than the originall bookes in Hebrew and Greeke that Christs body may be both visible and inuisible at one time and is in many places also at once that the body and bloud of Christ is really and carnally conteined and offred for quick and dead in the masse that Christians not consecrating are to receiue the communion onely vnder one kind that in purgatory soules satisfie for temporall paines of sinnes remitted that the Pope by dispensing the merits of Saints by indulgences is able to deliuer soules from the paines of purgatory that charity is the forme of faith and is that grace that maketh vs acceptable to God and diuers other doctrines of that nature Secondly they oftentimes acknowledge the fathers errors Bellarmine de gratia primi hominis c. 16. taxeth Theodoret and Procopius for their opinion concerning the cherubim set for the guard of Paradise haec opinio saith he tam est inepta ridieula c. like wise lib. 2. de concilijs c. 8. he reprehendeth Irenaeus Cyprian Chrysostome and Oecumenius Canus lib. 7. loc theol c. 7. rehearseth diuers of the fathers and namely of those which beleeued that Adams soule was created before his body and that Angels were created before the world and that denied that the soules of the faithfull doe see God before the last iudgement generally they taxe Origen for diuers heresies and nouelties Eusebius for fauouring Origen and Arius Papias and Irenaeus for holding the heresie of the Millenarians Cyprian for rebaptizing heretickes Hilary for teaching that Christ in his passion felt not any paine as wee may see in Lombard seut lib. 3. dist 15. Russine for maintaining both the errors of Origen and Pelagius in these points therefore and such like they follow not the fathers by their owne confession Thirdly diuers bookes are published vnder the name of the fathers that were neuer written by them as for example the decretales that beare the names of the ancient Bishops of Rome the canons of the Apostles diuers actes of the Nicene councell of the councell of Sinuessa Neocaesarea Rome vnder Syluester and diuers others the commentaries vpon Iob set out vnder the name of Origen certaine treatises of Sion and Sina and of the inuention of S. Iohn Baptists head set out vnder the name of Cyprian a sermon de assumptione beatae Mariae set out vnder the name of Hierome diuers sermons and epistles set out vnder the name of Ambrose Chrysostome and other fathers diuers legendes condemned by Gelasiuâ— c. sancta Romana dist 15. and some of these the aduersaries themselues deny not to be counterfet as doth appeare by the censure of Gelasius aboue mentioned of Erasmus Caietan Sixtus Senensis and other Popish writers now they that bring foorth counterret and basterdly writings of heretikes and men vnlearned in liew of the testimonies of fathers must first proue that the writings alledged by them are authenticall before they can say that they alledge fathers Fourthly the fathers were not all of one opinion Chrysostome homil 18. in Genes Nyssenus de creat hommis c. 18. Hierome lib. 1. in Iouinianum and others suppose that if Adam had not fallen neither woman should haue beene subiect vnto man nor should mankind haue beene propagated by mariage but S. Augustine lib. 14. de ciuit dei c. 21. and lib. 9. de Genes ad lit c. 3. and Eucherius and others are of a contrarie opinion Hierome in c. 1. Eccles and others doe hold that Salomon repented himselfe of his sinnes Augustine in Psal 126. thinketh otherwise concerning the beginning of soules and their estate also after this life the fathers are diuided some thinke that after diuorce the party innocent may marry others thinke contrary great difference also there was in the beginning about the feast of Easter the fast of Saturday and Lent these therefore that alledge a father or two where the soundest and best learned thinke otherwise cannot say that fathers make for them Finally albeit all the fathers should speake against the Pope yet doe not the Papists value them at any thing si totus mundus sententiaret contra Papam c. if all the world should giue sentence against the Pope saith a canonist yet are we to stand to the Popes determination commonly the Papists make as light accompt of fathers as any men if they speake against them Caictan in the beginning of his commentaries vpon Genesis signifieth that he goeth against the streame of the doctors in expounding scriptures The
all the fathers almost denie publicke penance to Priests and Deacons fallen into notorious crimes but the popish faction regardeth them not one iote Bellarmine lib. 1. de eucharist c. 11. saith that Augustine did not well weigh these words of Luke I will drinke no more of the fruit of the vine Augustine lib. 22. de ciuit Dei c. 10. saith that Christians doe not worship martyrs or erect remples in their honour lib. 1. de morib eccles c. 3. he denieth that we are to adore any ereature Hierome also ioineth with him in this opinion mepist ad Riparium but the popish sect doth not regard what they say nor followeth their doctrine Finally it were an easie matter to shew the fathers to bee aduerse to popery in all materiall controuersies but what shall wee neede to doe it seeing their late corruptions and false allegations of fathers doe plainlie testifie that they doe not hope for victory if the fathers may be truely alleadged of late they haue set out indexes expurgatory teaching Printers how to falsifie fathers Sixtus Senensis inepist ad Pium 5. ante biblioth sanct sheweth how that Pope had caused the fathers to bee purged or rather corrupted expurgari fecisti omnium authorum catholicorum saith he praecipuè veterum patrum scripta Pameluts hath most shamefully corrupted Cyprian and the like course all Papists take with the bookes of the fathers lately set foorth Somtime also they confesse the corruption of fathers Aeneas Sylu. lib. 1. de gest concil Basil sheweth how Popes stand vpon these words vocaberis Cephas and lanch into the deepe and such like neglecting the exposition of all the holy doctors posthabitis omnino omnium sanctorum expositionibus Alan Chartier saith they reiect the holy doctrine of fathers sanctâ—â— patrum doctrine reiectae posthabitae sunt Matth. Paris in Wilhelmo Conquest speaking of Hildebrandes decree against maried Priests saith it was made without consideration and against the iudgement of holy fathers inconsiderato iudicio contra sanctorum patrum sententiam CHAP. XIX That Popish religion was neuer testified by the blood of Christian martyrs STrange it were if the martyrs of Christ should turne from Christ and testifie for Antichrist yet because the aduersaries of truth doe boast of ancient martyrs and Bristow in his 15. motiue doth place Martyrs as setters foorth of the Popes glorious kingdome we are briefly to shew that the testification of Martyrs maketh nothing for popish religion and that appeareth first for that the Papists refuse to bee tried by the doctrine of the Apostles which were principall Martyrs Secondly we haue shewed that the principall points of Popery were neither taught nor receiued during the time of the primitiue Martyrs nor many ages after and that many points now taught and receiued among Papists were then refused as heresies Thirdly Papists adore idols and burne incense vnto them but the ancient Martyrs were therefore martyred cruelly put to death because they would not consent to the worship of idols nor burne incense to them Fourthly the practises of Papists declare that they are more like to the heathen Emperors and persecutors of Christians then to the ancient martyrs of Christs church for as they massacred Christians for maintenance of the Apostolike faith so do the Popes and their complices massacre all that stand for the same as they by sword and fire sought to vphold idolatry so doe these as they hated them deadly which taught the true faith so doe these Finally the confession of the faith published by Pius the fourth and that doctrine which the conuenticle of Trent hath of late confirmed and commanded to be taught and beleeued is in many points contrarie to the faith of ancient martyrs and in all points of controuersie betwixt Papists and vs vtterly vnknowne to them The holy Apostles commend scriptures and so doe ancient martyrs but Papists accuse them of insufficiencie obscuritie flexibility and call them a nose of waxe and a killing letter Ancient martyrs were burned and put to death because they would not deliuer holy scriptures to be burnt the Papists doe burne scriptures and suspect such for heretikes as reade them in vulgar tongues The Apostles and Primitiue martyrs beleeued the scriptures because they came from God the Papists will not haue scriptures to bee belecued vnlesse they be deliuered by the Pope They taught neither heresie nor impiety nor noueltie but Popish religion as before is declared is full of heresies impieties nouelties In ancient time the Bishops of Rome were martyrs now those that call themselues their successors doe murder Gods Saints and make them martyrs Ancient martyrs taught that one God was to bee adored the Papists giue diuine honour to the crosse and crucifixe and call the Sacrament their Lord and God Ancient martyrs did breake downe images now the Papists erect them fall downe before them and worship them Finally ancient martyrs neuer beleeued that either doggs or hogs could eate Christs body or that the same was in any place where it could neither be felt nor seene or that the same was both in heauen and earth and euery pixe at one time or that bread is transubstaÌ„tiated into Christs body or that Christians do with their teeth eate mans flesh or with their throats swallow mans blood or that the bishop of Rome is lord and monarch of the church or that he can fetch souls out of Purgatorie or that there is a treasure of Saints merites out of which indulgences are granted or that Christians are iustified by extreme vnction or eating fish and such like Popish deuises Neither is it materiall that these holy martyrs are put in Popish calenders for the Iewes bragged of their father Abraham and adorned the sepulchers of the Prophets although they neither abode in the faith of Abraham nor followed the doctrine of the Prophets Further Bristow telleth vs that S. Stephen helped all those that sought vnto him but his proofes are drawne out of legendes and certeine counterset sermons of S. Augustine in his 22. chapter de ciuit dei c. 8. there is no such matter and yet these reports that are there inserted seeme to be none of S. Augustines but suppose certein superstitious persoÌ„s should pray to S. Stephen yet S. Stephen neuer taught them so to do nor allowed such formes of praiers Lastly he talketh of Fisher More the Charterhouse monks and diuers that died in king Henry the 8. the late Queens reigne for the Popes cause and telleth vs that they were of his religion but it is first denied that they were martyrs and next that Fisher and More were of the moderne Romish religion the first is proued for that they died for the Pope and not for Christ Secondly they died as traitors either by open rebellion or by ouert act oppugning the Princes authoritie the second is euident for that diuers of them died before the conuenticle of Trent which hath now published a new forme of faith and decreed many things
foundation and pillar of our faith they doe make the traditions of the church not written equall to the scriptures and vpon them nay vpon the decretales of Popes and practise of Massepriestes doe build their faith all antiquitie esteemeth holy scriptures to be the canon of our faith and therefore calleth them canonicall But the Romanists esteeme them to be an vnperfect canon without their traditions and the Popes decretales and determinations Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. dei c. 4. saith they are neither necessary nor sufficient without traditions The fathers neuer accounted the bookes of Tobiah Iudith Ecclesiasticus Wisdome and the Machabees equall to the bookes of the law and Prophets extant originally in Hebrew as appeareth by the testimony of Hierome in prologo Galeato of Athanasius in synopsi of Nazianzen in carm of Epiphanius and diuers others old and new writers the Papists in the synode of Trent decree them to be of equall authoritie with the rest the auncient catholikes euer esteemed the Hebrew text of the old testament and the Greeke of the new to be more authentical then anie translation the conuenticle of Trent hath made the old latin vulgar translation of the bible authenticall and doth not giue that honor to the originall bookes of the bible the canonicall scriptures we say receiue their force from the author of them and this is to be prooued by the consent of fathers and by arguments from scriptures law and reason they say that scriptures receiue force and authoritie in respect of vs from the Church or rather from the Pope Papists are neither willing that scriptures be turned into vulgar tongues nor will permitte them to be read of the vulgar sort without licence or publickly read in vulgar tongues in the church finally they say they are obscure and hard to be vnderstood and speake what they can in their disgrace Secondly they teach erroneously concerning Christs naturall body and concerning his office the body of Christ they beleeue to be both in heauen and on earth on euerie altar at one and the selfe same time they also hold that his body is really vnder the accidents of bread and wine giuing him a body neither visible nor palpable nor in any sort like to ours they teach further that his body is in diuers places where it filleth not the places and that his one body hath relation to diuers places they beleeue that the soules of the faithfull before Christes comming were in hell or at least in Limbo which is a part of hell and were thence deliuered by Christes going to hell as if his crosse had wrought nothing for them they teach that Christ as man is omniscient and per consequent omnipotent and that he was vir perfectus that is a perfect or growne man from the first instant of his conception his office of mediation they giue to the virgin Mary to Angels and to Saints they make also Saints our redeemers teaching that by their merits Christians obteine their desires and are deliuered out of purgatorie to Masse-priests they giue priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech and say that they offer vp Christs body and blood really for quicke and dead finally they make the Pope head spouse and monarke of the Church Neither doe they teach more catholikely of Christes mysticall body then of his naturall body for they subiect the same to the Pope and exclude all from Christ that are not subiect to the Pope the true members thereof they persecute and make heretikes and reprobates and such as liue without order or law professing their religion outwardly true members of Christes body the Church say they is alwaies so conspicuous and visible that euery one may see it and discerne it the true markes of the church that is true doctrine and the sincere administration of Sacraments and holinesse of life they denie assigning most common and vncerteine markes as vnitie vniuersalitie antiquitie succession and such like The Pope they make a most certeine and infallible interpreter of Scriptures and iudge of matters of faith they giue him authoritie to make lawes for the whole Church and power to binde mens consciences they make him more souereigne then a generall Councell and say that his power in giuing indulgences reacheth into purgatorie they say he hath power to excommunicate and depose kings and to giue away their kingdomes to others Betwixt the Catholicke church and Roman church they make no difference equalling a part to the whole they say also that the Roman church can neither erre nor faile The worship of God consisteth in spirit and trueth but they place the same in certeine externall rites and ceremonies and in meere humane inuentions and deuices nay for God they worship creatures not onely giuing diuine honour to the Sacrament but also to crucifixes and images of the Trinitie made of wood stone and colours they doe also adore not onely saints but rotten bones and ragges they know not of whom to Saints they pray they make vowes they confesse their sinnes to saints they erect churches and altars to their images they burne incense and present diuers oblations and finally in the honour of Saints haue deuised particular masses and offices transforming the Psalmes and wordes of Scriptures to Angels and Saints Their doctrine concerning the Sacraments is most exorbitant for they doe not onely adde vnto water in Baptisme salt spittle oile and diuers other ceremonies partly idle partly superstitious but also vnto the two Sacraments instituted by Christ they equall confirmation matrimonie penance orders and extreme vnction making them Sacraments as well as Baptisme or the Lords Supper in Confirmation they haue deuised both a new signe and new wordes in extreme Vnction they haue deuised new formes in the ordring of Priestes they say accipe potestatem offerendi sacrisicium in ecclesia pro viuis mortuis that is receiue power to offer sacrifice in the church for quicke and dead in Penance they vrge a necessity of confession strange formes of whipping and vncerteine hopes and new deuices of satisfaction from Matrimonie they exclude Priestes monkes and friars and make it a Sacrament albeit they know neither certeine signes nor words of the institution of it but the institution of the Lords supper they haue quite abolished for that which Christ ordeined to be receiued of the Communicants that the masse-priest doth offer for quicke dead and in the honour of Saints and Angels of which there is not one worde spoken in the institution our Sauiour in bread and wine instituted his last supper these neither leaue bread nor wine but make Christians eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood like the canibals Cyclopes Christ ordeined this Sacrament in remembrance of his death and passion these make of the same a sacrifice in honour of Angels and Saints the cup of the new testament they take from Christians abrogating as much as in them lieth the new testament established in Christs blood and
yet they say Christians sinne mortally if they heare not Masse euery Sunday and holiday Of grace they speake as men deuoid of grace and knowledge for by grace by which we are saued and made acceptable to God they vnderstand nothing else but either charity or a habit not distinct from Charity so that albeit they exclude not grace from the worke of our saluation yet making grace a habit or vertue they ouerthrow grace and ascribe the merit of our saluation not to Gods mercie through Christ nor to the merit of his Passion but properly to our owne workes and merites diuers of them saie that men are predestinated for their merites foreseene and all hold that men were reprobated for their sinnes foreseene before they say further that the vnregenerat hath freewill as well as the regenerat and that not onely in matters of this life but also to doe workes of piety and other supernaturall effectes The doctrine of faith they haue also much corrupted for they make Charity the forme of faith as if faith were without forme or life of it selfe and as if the iust man did not liue by faith to this purpose they say that not onlie wicked and reprobat men but also the diuels of hell maie haue true and iustifying faith they hold further that by faith we are not onely to hold whatsoeuer is conteined in holy scriptures but also whatsoeuer is deliuered by tradition or determined by the Pope and lastly that no man is to beleeue that he shall assuredly be saued but rather to hold that he that is truly iustified may be damned Concerning the law of God they teach both contrary to reason and law for first they cut out the 2. commandement in their offices of our Lady and their primers because it cannot well stand with the Popish worship of images secondly they teach that concupiscence without our consent is not sinne albeit the law say non concupisces thirdly they say that it is sinne as well to transgresse the Popes decrees as Gods lawes fourthly they beleeue that the Pope is able either to dissolue the law as for example where he absolueth subiectes from their obedience to princes and children from their duty to parents or at the least to dispense with the transgressors of the law as for example with periured persons adulterers Sodomites murtherers assassinors theeues sacrilegious persons and such like fiftly they beleeue that a man is able perfectly to fulfill the law of which it followeth that man is able to liue without all sinne which as Augustine sheweth lib. 4. de bono perseuerat c. 2. 5 and Hierome aduers Pelag. is flat Pelagianisme In their doctrine of praiers they offend much yet is the practise of Papists farre worse than their doctrine in this point our Sauiour teacheth vs to goe to his father in his name they go to God by the intercession of Saints nay oftentimes they run to Saints Angels and the blessed Virgin without once thinking of God especially if they thinke no more than they vtter in their praiers they pray in a tongue which they vnderstand not which is rather prating than praying they pray for remission of sinnes for the dead not knowing whether they bee damned or no. they pray before stockes and stones nay they put their trust in them for if this were not so why should they hope for better successe at the image of our Lady of Loreto or Monserat than at any other image or forme of our Lady They beleeue that almes satisfie for sinnes and that those are best bestowed that are giuen to Monkes and Friers and such idle vagabonds and plagues of states whereas the first ouerthroweth Christs merits and satisfaction the second is an occasion of all the mischiefes brewed by these mothes of religion and blemishes of state They teach that it is mortall sinne not to fast on Saints vigiles embre daies and other times appointed by the Pope and that fasting standeth in eating fish and abstaining from our suppers and such obseruances and finally that such fasts doe not only satisfie for sinnes but also merit heauen Conscience they know not for they make no conscience to cut Christian mens throats for not yeelding to all their abhominations and thinke it conscience to obey the Popes decrees though very vnlawfull Neither can they well auoid sinne that know not what sinne is The virgin Mary by most of them is acquited from originall sinne and they define sinne to bee not onely the transgression of the law of God but also euery transgression of the law of the Pope nay euery breach of the law of man which vtterly taketh away the difference betwixt the lawes of God and man Of the state of soules departed they seeme to know little truly although some say they know too much for they do not say as we doe that there are two waies after this life the one of the faithfull to eternall life the other of the wicked to eternall death but they say that some go into purgatorie and others into limbus puerorum and out of purgatory they say soules are deliuered partly by masses and partly by indulgences All these points of erroneous false doctrine and all others which either contrarie or beside the word of God the Pope and his complices haue inuented and brought into the church of Rome we call Popery and this is the subiect of this discourse and the doctrine against which we dispute let no man therefore thinke because the Papists maintaine many points of Christian religion that either we reprehend that truth which they and we defend or that they can defend the errors of Popery because they hold some trueth but either let them iustifie their errors or else they shall bee forced to confesse that the proper doctrine of Popery is wicked and erroneous CHAP. II. Of the grounds and foundations of Popish religion AS Popery is diuers from Christian religion so hath the same other foundations than Christian religion The doctors of Trent in the fourth session of that synode hauing pronounced them anathema that shall not receiue all the bookes of the Bible as they are found in the old Latin vulgar translation and read in the church of Rome for holy and canonicall or that shall wittinglie contemne the traditions of that church doe signifie that this is the foundation of the confession of faith which they meant to publish so it appeareth they ground their faith beside canonicall scriptures vpon apocryphall writings of Tobiah Iudith Wisedome Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees and diuers fragments of books not found in the Hebrew text of the Bible and vpon traditions not written but deliuered from hand to hand from the Apostles as they say and so come to their hands but where they speake of scriptures it is to be obserued that they doe not simply allow them but as they are contained in the old vulgar translation and as they are expounded by the Church of Rome those which vnder any
decretales and Romish traditions CHAP. III. Of the wicked doctrine of Papistes concerning the law of God and the performance thereof LOng it were to relate all the wicked and false doctrines of Popery in euery point of Christian faith beside that the same is performed largely by diuers learned men in diuers ample volumes we will therefore heere speake onely of some principall points of religion and shew how they haue beene by our aduersaties most notoriously abused and corrupted and so proceed to intreat of the beginnings proceedings impieties falsities contradictions and other abuses and defects that are generally found in Popery First then wee finde that they haue not only taught impiously of Gods law but also reiected the same for their owne traditions generallie they hold that the Popes lawes bind in conscience and that it is sinne to transgresse them but if this were so then were not the knowledge of sinne by the law as the Apostle teacheth vs neither were the law of God perfect nor a certaine rule of Christian life nor were God the onely lawgiuer that could saue and destroy Bellarmine lib. 1. de stat peccat c. 3. saith that there are certaine sinnes or transgressions of the law so light and little that they deserue not eternall death but this doth frustrate the sanction or vigour of the law that pronounceth them accursed which continue not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to do them as we read Galat. 3. The Scotists and most Papists now hold that the Virgin Mary was neither conceiued in sinne nor euer committed sinne but the Apostle Rom. 5 saith that by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne went ouer all and Galat. 3. he sheweth how the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne All of them hold that in the regenerate concupiscence is no sinne yet can they not deny but that concupiscence is forbidden by the law of God and thereupon the Iebusites in their censure of Colein denie all to bee sinne that is repugnant to the law of God Let Christians therefore imagine whether they will follow the Apostle that sheweth sin to bee knowen by the law and that concupiscence is sinne or the Iebusites denying the same The Iebusites of Collein fol. 194. affirm that what the law commandeth concerning the loue of God with our whole hart mind soule pertaineth not to vs in this life as if God had giuen a law to soules in the life to come and not to men in this life this error our Sauiour confuteth Matth. 22. where he assoileth the Scribes question concerning the greatest commandement in the law The same fellowes fol. 48. affirme that a regenerate man is able to performe the law of God perfectly but if this be so then they are deepe plunged in the heresie of the Pelagians who were condemned for holding that Christians are able to liue without all sinne The Papists teach that we are to bee iustified and saued by the workes of the law but the Apostle 2. Cor. 3. teacheth contrarie that the law is the minister of death The law of God forbiddeth vs the hauing of other gods beside him in which commandement wee are also forbidden to giue the honour of God to creatures but Papists beside God in heauen haue a God on earth as appeareth euidently by the chap. satis dist 96. and diuers glosses of canonists and glosing flatteries of Papistes they worship the sacrament also as God and Bellarmine lib. de monachis c. 14. doth call Saints Gods by participation the honour of God they giue to Saints and Angels yea to the images of Christ of the Crosse and of the Trinity in the honour of Angels and Saints they say masses and offices they erect churches altars and images and burne incense vnto them they call vpon them sweare by them make vowes and confesse their sinnes vnto them The second law of the first table prohibiteth the making of grauen images to the intent to bow vnto them and to worship them but Papistes do both make them and praie and crouch before them they do also offer gifts and burne incense vnto them as the heathen did to their idols nay which the heathen did neuer they giue the same honour to a picture of Christ or of the Crosse or of the Trinity which they giue to God himselfe praying to the Crosse they say ô Crosse of Christ protect me ô Crosse of Christ defend mee from all euill The third law forbid deth periury the vaine vse of swearing and all abuses of Gods holy name and word but little is the same regarded by the Pope and his complices for they do not onely breake their oathes but also lightly dispense with periured persons Gregory the seuenth as in his life appeareth forswore the papacy and yet regarded not his oath the like we find related of Pope Formosus commonly they loose and assoile subiects from the bond of their oath to Princes absoluit Gregorius 7. omnes a iuramento quos fidei tenuit obligatio saith he that wrote the life of Henry the fourth Paschal the second hauing solemnly sworne to the Emperour presently brake his oath as we may see in Otho Frisingensis and diuers other historiographers Gregory the twelsth as Theodoric à Niem testifieth tract vnion 6. c. 29. was publickely accounted a periured person periurus publicus Charles the French King as Theodoric à Niem tract vnion 6. c. 14. testifieth chargerh Gregory the twelfth and Peter de luna with periury violauerunt sidem fregerunt votum promissum non tenuerunt and againe ô magnum scelestum facinus saith hee speaking of their periuries Innocent the seuenth hauing vowed and sworne to vnite the papacy would not doe it notwithstanding his oath as wee read tract vnion 6. c. 39. quam vouit iurauit facere noluit vnionem in the conuenticle of Constance it was decreed by this wicked synagogue that oathes and promises were not to be holden being made to heretickes the periury of Ladislaus which Eugenius the fourth induced him vnto cost the losse of many mens liues Gulcciardine histor lib. 8. doth testifie that the Pope decreed that it should be lawfull to recall all couenants and promises made by the Popes predecessors that impious fellow Pius the 5. in his Bul against Queene Elizabeth of pious memory did excommunicate such as would not take armes against her and yet her subiects were sworne to obey her all Papists commonly are great swearers and forswearers in the Roman Catechisme in 2. mandat they complaine that their people were giuen to swearing and cursing Quis non videat say they omnia iureiurando assirmari omnia imprecationibus execrationibus referta esse they sweare by saints bread salt and other creatures infringing Gods commandement Deut. 6. that requireth men to sweare by his name Finally the Popes and their complices most shamefully wrest and turne scriptures making them serue to their humours and pleasures The fourth
Christs humane nature as Aquinas 3. q. 5. art 2. confesseth if hee had taken a heauenly body as Valentine beleeued saith Aquinas then could not the truth of Christs humane nature haue beene saued which requireth flesh and bones In the 24. of Luke our Sauiour sheweth that he had a body that both had flesh and bones and was to be selt and seene 31. In their abominable masse they make their polshorne Priests mediators for Christ making them to pray that God would looke vpon the body and bloud of Christ with a propitious and serene countenance supra quae saith the Priest looking vpon the sacrifice as they call it of Christs body and bloud propitio ac sereno vultu respacere digneris accepta habere c. 32. They compare also the sacrifice of the body bloud of Christ to the sacrifice of brute beasts offered by Abel and to the sacrifice of Melchisedech praying that God would accept Christs body and bloud as hee accepted the sacrifices of Melchisedech and Abel which is a most blasphemous comparison 33. In the masse also they confesse their sins to God to Angels and Saints iointly and not to Christ. nay they vse the mediation of Christ in their confession of sinnes to Angels and Saints preferring them as much before Christ as a Prince is to be preferred before mediators and hushiers 34. In a certaine prouincial constitution beginning authoritate de sentent excom they excommunicate by the authority of God Almighty and of Saints and leaue out Christ 35. They say Masses in honour of Angels and Saints but he in whose honour a sacrifice is offered is greater then the sacrifice doth it not then appeare that while they pretend to offer Christs body and bloud in honour of Angels and Saints that they make him inferiour to Angels and Saints 36. They call the Pope the head king spouse and foundation of the church but this cannot bee without extreame wrong to Christ for one king dome cannot admit two kings nor a viceking while the king is present nor can one woman haue two spouses or one body two heads or one house two diuers foundations the Apostle 1. Cor. 3. sheweth that no man can lay other foundation then that which is alreadie laid Ephes 5. he saith Christ is the head of the church the Sauiour of his body the synagogue of Rome therfore sheweth her selfe a strange beast that will needs haue two heads and two foundations being altogether so diuers 37. S. Iames sheweth that there is but one lawgiuer of the Church that is able to saue and destroy the doe therefore spoile Christ of his honour that giue this title of lawgiuer to the Pope 38. They doe also preferre the Pope before Christ for Christs body when the Pope goeth on progresse is sent before with the baggage and when the Pope is neere goeth out to meet him while all the gallants of rome attend on the Pope 39. They giue authority to the Pope to draw soules out of purgatory by his indulgences and to make portsale of Christs merits but he that is sold is neuer equal to the seller neither can the Papists shew that euer Christ deliuered one soule out of Purgatory 40. Papists beleeue that the Pope hath often times created his creator or at the least made Christs body and bloud but that Christ made the Pope it cannot be shewed doth it not then appeare that by many degrees the Pope excelleth Christ in the opinion of Papists 41. Nay they make S. Francis and Dominicke equall to Christ in diuers things and in some things superiour as their bookes of conformities and legendes doe testifie they call S. Francis Iesum typicum that is a figuratiue Iesus and say that Dominicke and Francis did more miracles then Christ but the Pope gaue both these two all their credit he must therefore needs surpasse Christ in accompt of Papistes 42. In the conuenticle of Trent Cornelius Bishop of Bitonto said papa lux venit in mundum the Pope the light came into the world and Simon Begnius in the councell of Lateran called Leo the tenth the lion of the tribe of Iuda and cried out Te Leo beatissime saluatorem expectauimus that is we blessed Leo haue looked for thee our Sauiour 43. Beno the Cardinall sheweth that Gregory the seuenth cast Christs body into the fire burning the Sauiour of Papists Pius the fifth also is said to haue cast an agnus Dei into the fire as Catena in his life reporteth into this contempt haue the Pupists brought their Gods 44 Theodorie à Niem lib. primo de schismate sheweth that Vrbane the Pope melted crosses and images of siluer to paie souldiers thus that which they pretend to honour as God they sell and giue away in seruice of the Diuell 45 They giue equall honour to a crosse of woode and mettall and to Christ and looking on a wooden crucifixo they say thou hast redeemed vs. who then seeth not what little accompt they make of Christ 46 A trentall of Masses the Masse-priests sell for lesse sometimes than sixe pence and yet they say Christs bodie is offered in euery Masse are they not therefore more wicked traitors than Iudas who would not fell Christ for lesse then 30. pence 47 The Priesthood according to the order of Melchisedech is proper to Christ by the Apostles doctrine but the Papists make euery pild pated companion a Priest after the order of Melchisedech Finally the office of mediator properly belonging to Christ they communicate with the virgin Mary whom they suppose to be more mercifull then Christ they giue it also to Angels and Saints and Masse-priests Turrecremata summae lib. 1. c. 40. speaking of Priests saith they are mediators reconciling sinners to God ministerium peragunt mediatoris omnipotenti Deo qui offensus fuerat peccatores reconciliando the schoolemen say also that Saints may be called redeemers and that is confessed by Bellarmine lib. 1. de indulgentijs Infinite it were to report all the blasphemous speeches and practises of Papists against the honour of Christ Iesus but this may serue to shew that they rather blaspheme than honor Christ speaking so wickedly of his person so blasphemously of his bodie so falsly of his actions and taking away his honour and giuing the same to others CHAP. VII The strange contradictorie and false opinions of Papists concerning the sacraments AS Sacraments are seales of Gods grace and holy mysteries by the which God worketh our sanctification so are they enemies of Gods grace and the sanctification of Christians that peruert the Apostles doctrine and Christs institution concerning sacraments how then the doctors of the synagogue of Rome shal be able to excuse themselues and to prooue themselues not to be enuious of the good of Christians I report me to their common doctrine and practise concerning this argument for first they denie that the sacraments of the law of Moyses did open heauen and thereupon thrust all the
administring of the sacrament intentio ministri sayth he requiritur ad perfectionem sacramenti and this is so necessarily required by all Papists in consecration of the eucharist that without the same they say there is no consecration the being then and perfection of sacraments depending vpon the priests intention it followeth that the state of things in the Roman church wil be brought to very great vncerteinty for neither can it be proued that he that ordered the Pope had an intention to order him or that the Romish priests haue an intention alwayes to baptize and consecrate or the parties among them that do mary do intend any such matter how then can the Papists be assured that the Romish church is the true church or that the Popes iudgement is infallible or whether they be idolaters or no when they worship the sacrament when they are vncerteine whether the Pope be either well ordered or baptized or whether their Priests be well ordered and haue truely consecrated the eucharist 9. The master of the sentences lib. 4. dist 3. § ex his determineth that true baptisme is administred in the name of Christ only or the father only or the holy Ghost only ex his apertè intellexisti sayth he in nomine Christs verum baptisma tradi vnde nihilominus insinuari videtur verum baptisma dari posse in nomine Patris tantùm vel Spiritus sancti tantùm si tamen ille qui baptizat sidem Trinitatis teneat But this is as much as if he should say that euery Priest may alter Christes institution and that their owne orders and rites are not to be altered Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 66. art 6. doth condemne his masters opinion 10. Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 66. art 4. determineth that Christians may be baptized in lie or in beefe broth or porredge in lixiuio aquis sulphureis sieri potest baptismus he saith also the water is not changed by boiling flesh in it doe we then maruell if Masse-priests be so fat Christians seeing they allow baptisme in lie and beefe broth this certes is far from the decencie that is required in the administration of holy mysteries and sauoureth of strange curiosity heereto also may be added that they baptize bels and giue them names and this the Germanes touch in their grieuances 11. Vrbane the Pope c. super quo 30. q. 3. giueth that authority to women which all Papists allow not the fathers certes neither knew it nor allowed it 12. The conuenticle of Trent sess 7. pronounceth him anathema that shall say that baptisme is not necessarie to saluation but this falleth on Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 68. art 2. that supposeth it sufficient to haue baptisme in voto those which allow baptisme as wel of bloud and the holy ghost as of water the conuenticle of Trent thinketh it all one to say that baptisme is not necessary and that baptisme is free as if man not sinning necessarily had not free will to commit sin 13. Martin ab Aspilcueta in enchir c. de baptismo saith he doth sin that annointeth him that is baptised with chrisme kept ouer the yeare of which sinne neither the Apostles nor ancient fathers euer heard any thing 14. Kellison in his Suruey doth not take them to bee perfect Christians that are not confirmed after his popish fashion but this fashion of greasing was neuer knowen to the ancient fathers furthermore this being granted the Papists in England should be very imperfect Christians the most of them wanting this supposed vnctuous consignation 15. The sacrament of baptisme they say may be administred not only by Priests but also by laymen and women but they doe not permit any to consigne men with chrisme but their Prelates and for that they bring foorth the testimony of Euscbius a bishop of Rome de consecrat dist 5. manus so sarre doe they preferre their owne inuentions before Christs institution and so little are they ashamed to alleadge counter fait writings 16. Whether the sacrament of the cucharist bee one or more sacraments they stand in doubt because in a certaine collect the same is both called sacramentum and sacramenta and Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 73. art 2. resolueth that it is one formally and two materially so that materially hee maketh more than seuen sacraments 17. In this sacrament of the eucharist they require bread of wheat and wine of the grape as the matter of the sacrament and yet they say neither bread nor wine remaineth therein after consecration 18. They say Christs body is truely in the host and his bloud in the chalice after consecration and yet is he neither felt nor seene there nor can a bodie of that quantity be contained in so little roome 19. Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 75. art 3. will not grant that bread and wine is annihilated after consecration as if there could at one time be no bread nor wine in the sacrament and yet no annihilation of the bread and wine or as if no part of bread and wine remaining it might not be said properly to be brought to nothing 20. Franciscus a victoria in his booke of sacraments c. de eucharistia wil not yeeld that the Priest may consecrate barly bread because barly as he saith is meat for horses but he saith that rie bread may well be consecrated forasmuch as that is bread for men yet others thinke otherwise 21. The accidents of bread and wine wee see remaine in the sacrament but they cannot tell how they should subsist where there is neither bread nor wine 22. Christ ordained this sacrament to be eaten and drunken but the Papists oftentimes neither eat nor drinke the sacrament but carrie it about or hang it vpon the altar 23. If a mouse or other liuing creature take away the consecrated host they will haue the same to be taken if it be possible and to be burned and the ashes to be kept for reliques as we read in the treatise de defect in celebrat miss 24. They beleene that Christs body is in the eucharist because Christ said this is my bodie why then doe they beleeue that his soule and bloud is there seeing hee spoke there of neither 25. In the sacrament they tell how sometime there hath appeared true flesh true blond and Christ in the forme of a child but if this be true then is he not there as they hold sub specie aliena that is vnder another kind 26. Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 77. art 2. will haue other accidents to be sounded in quantity as in their subiect but it is absurd to make one accident the subiect of another and yet doth this absurdity being granted little relieue them for they cannot shew how the accident of quantity should subsist without subiect 27. They say that accidents in the sacraments due nourish but of that it followeth that accidents are turned into substance which is more than alchymisticall tranâ—… 〈◊〉 28. In the sacrament they see by experience
the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets and therefore we may not thinke that they taught that Christ had a bodie inuisible or inpalpable or that his body was in heauen and earth at one time and yet not continued to it selfe or that his soule was omnipotent or omniscient or that Christians were to beleeue that dogges and hogges did eat Christs body and yet that all the communicants saue the Priest were to be excluded from the cup of the new Testament or that Christ is onely the meritorious cause of our iustification and saluation and that formally we are iustified and saued by our owne workes or that remission of sinnes cannot be obtained vnlesse we come to auricular confession and haue the Masse-priests absolution or that the Pope by his indulgences out of superfluous merits of Saints is able to deliuer soules from purgatory or other popish heresies and wicked doctrines before mentioned for these doctrines are contrarie to the holy scriptures in which the summe of the Apostles preaching is conteined Gregory the first lib. 4. epist 32. doth dislike the title of vniuersall bishop and calleth it sacrilegious and prophane he doth also condemne the worship of images lib. 7. epist 109. and lib. 9. epist 9. and commendeth Serenus the bishop of Massilia for reproouing the adoration of images neither doth he allow any more than the historicall vse of them that Purgatory which Gregory the Dialogist speaketh of differeth much from popish purgatory being rather designed for veniall sinnes than for satisfaction for temporall paines after the fault remitted lib. moral 19. c. 16. hee sheweth that the bookes of the Machabees are not canonicall scriptures and lib. 14. moral c. 32. that Christs body is solide and not like a spirit and lib. 4. dial c. 55. that things aboue in the eucharist are vnited to things below summa imis consociantur of which it followeth that there is no such presence as the Papists imagine nor any transubstantiation for if the bodie of Christ residing aboue be vnited to things below then is not Christs body included within the accidents of the host nor is the bread and wine abolished Augustine the Monke brought with him a crosse and the image of our sauiour in a table and did sing litanies as Bede testifieth lib. 1. hist Angl. c. 25. but we doe not read that hoe filled Churches with images or that hee worshipped Christs image or the crosse with latria or that in his litanies he called vpon Saints or Angels Bede saith they praied to God litanias canentes c. domino supplicabant If then we cannot find the points of popery which we refuse in the writings of the Apostles or in any record mentioning the doctrin of Ioseph of Arimathaea Eleutherius Gregory or Austen but rather find them to bee opposite to their doctrine and denised afterwards then vnlesse we meane to remooue the ancient limits and bounds set downe to vs by our fathers and to refuse the counsell of the holy ghost Prouerb 22. wee may not returne to popery forasmuch as the first conuerters of the inhabitants of this land were no authours nor fauourers of popish superstition heresies impieties and blasphemies CHAP. XV. That popish religion is most falsely termed Catholike religion and Papists Catholickes CAtholicke religion as Vincentius Lirinensis in his commonitory chap. 3. doth teach vs is that which alwaies hath beene beleeued and of all Christians wee are to hold saith he that which alwaies hath beene beleeued of all Christians for that is properly Catholicke but the faith of the Romish church conteined in the Popes decretales and disputes of the canonists and schoolemen hath not alwaies beene beleeued of all Christians their faith therfore is not catholike the assumption is proued not onely by the nouelties of the decretales glosses of Canonists and summes and resolutions of the schoole diuines but also by the falsehood and contrarieties of the doctrine therein conteined Nicholas in his decretale ego Berengarius de consecrat dist 2. teacheth that Christs body sensually is handled with the hands of Priests and torne with teeth but this is contrary to scriptures fathers and truth Innocent in the chapter firmiter de sum trinit fid cath saith that the bread is transubstantiat into Christs body which is false for Christ saide of bread which hee tooke this is my bodie The Canonists honour the Pope as a God on earth as the head foundationmonah rcand spouse of the Church the schoolemen brabble one with another and sometimes change their owne opinions Bellarmine lib. 2. de purgat c. 3. confesseth that Thomas Aquinas changed his opinion concerning the merit of soules in Purgatorie most schoole-men build doctrines of faith vpon Philosophicall grounds and vary both from scriptures and fathers in their doctrine of the diuine attributes of Christs body and soule of merits of sacraments and diuers other points how then can we repute these doctrines to be catholike It is the Property of Catholikes saith Vincentius Lirinensis commonit c. 34. to keepe the doctrine committed to them and left with them by the auncient fathers and to auoid profane nouelties but the doctrine of schoolemen concerning the diuine attributes concerning the examples of the persons of the Trinitie brought by the master of sentences the eating of Christs body by brute beasts and diuers other points is ful of profanenesse and nouelties their reasons also are more philosophicall and sophisticall then Apostolicall all the points in controuersie betwixt vs and them are mere nouelties as the decretales whereon they depend declare Leo epist 81. saith that there is one true only perfect and inuiolable faith whereto nothing can be added and from which nothing can bee taken but vnto this faith the Popes haue added their determinations concerning traditions the carnall reall presence of Christs body and blood in the sacrament of the Lords supper transubstantiation the communion vnder one kind the Popes vicarship generall and vniuersall power purgatory indulgences the worship of images and diuers other pointes of doctrine doth it not then appeare that popery is nothing else but a corruption of doctrine comming in after the publication of the Christian Catholike faith and added vnto it Furthermore as the Apostolike doctrine is catholike and vniuersall so hereticall opinions are particular and peculiar to certaine sects and persons and times but wee haue shewed that Popery is nothing else but a packe of old and new heresies Lastly by many particulars it may be proued that the doctrine of Papists hath neither beene taught at all times nor imbraced of al christians nor spred ouer al the world which doth plainly declare that neither the doctrine is catholike nor the professors thereof truely termed Catholickes First they teach that the scriptures are an imperfect rule and vnsufficient without traditions and speake lewdly of them calling them a nose of waxe a killing and dead letter a matter of strife and what else they list to deuise in their
for it Ambrose Catharine tractat de imaginibus saith God prohibited images simply but that this prohibition was positiue others deny both images to be forbidden and the second commandement to be positiue Occham Maior and Richardus are of opinion that a sacrament cannot be defined Scotus in 4. dist 1. q. 2. holdeth that it may be defined imperfectly Ledesma in tract de sacrament in genere q. 1. art 2. saith it may properlie bee defined Finally to shew the contradictions of Papists we need to seeke no further than to Bellarmine who in euery controuersie bringeth in different opinions of men of his side Gardiner a pillar of popery did oftentimes contradict himselfe and his fellowes sometimes hee swore against the Popes supremacy sometime like a forsworne creature hee stood for it somtime he consented to the dissolution of monasteries as sinkes of Sodomy and all tibaldrie and villany sometime be spoke for them his booke entituled Marcus Constantius is full of contradictions M. Foxe hath scored vp great multitudes The contradictions of Robert Parsons in his book of three Conuersions I haue noted in my answeare to that treatise The whole masse also of Poperie doth consist of contrary pieces as I haue shewed in the contradictions of the doctrine of the Masse of purgatory of indulgences of the Pope and diuers other principall points and haue proued the same in treatises of that argument For example they say the Masse is an vnbloudy sacrifice and yet teach that euerie Priest doth really offer and drinke Christs bloud Sometime they say the sacrifice is but one sacrifice yet in the canon they say sacrifices in the plurall number Sometime they say the Priest only offereth this sacrifice but in the canoÌ„ they make the people to offer sacrifices In the canon they pray that Angels may carry Christs body vnto Gods high altar but all confesse that Christs body is in heauen before There also they make the Priest a mediatour for Christ. but where they speake soberly they make Christ a mediator both for the Priest and others In heauen they say Christ is visible and palpable on the altar they make him inuisible and impalpable They say the Masse is an externall sacrifice yet no man euer yet could see Christs body externally sacrificed In purgatorie they say soules suffer extreme paines but in the Masse they saie they slâ—epe in peace They teach that Christians may performe the law of God perfectly but they will not grant that they may liue without sinne which is all one Talking of auricular confession they make it necessarie but in the chap. Petrus doluit and lachrymae dist 1. de poenit they denie it The Pope calleth himselfe seruant of seruants yet doth he take vpon him as lord of lords Order they say is one sacrament yet they teach also that there are seuen Orders and euerie one of them a sacrament which is as much as if they should make one seuen and seuen one The Pope they saie is head of the Church but that is as much as if they should teach that their Church in the vacatio nis headlesse If then the catholicke faith be one and those that professe the faith agree in one then cannot popery be the true Catholicke faith that containeth so many contradictions CHAP. XXVII That popery is a most foolish and absurd religion AS the lawes of God are full of wisedome and giue vs a true vnderstanding so when man of his owne braine vndertaketh to adde vnto his commandements the same in proofe falleth out to be nothing but vanity and foolery the same wee sind verified in the additions of the superfluous religion of Papists for although it haue a shew of wisedome as the voluntarie worship of Angels had of which the Apostle Coloss 2. speaketh yet compared with the wisedome of God reuealed in the Gospell it is meere foolery For first what is more foolish then to forsake the liuing springs of holy scripture out of which do sally waters of life and to follow after the puddle streams of Romish traditions of scriptures we are assured that they are the word of God but no man can affirme that of Romish traditions or the Popes decretales that either professeth piety or loueth truth is it not then strange that any Christians should bee so foolish as to match the word of man with Gods word and where we haue a certaine rule to seeke for a broken vncertaine and crooked rule Againe it is most absurd not to beleeue the scriptures without the Popes warrant but to say that Christians are not to beleeue in God nor in Christ Iesus nor to receiue the rest of the articles of our Creed vnlesse the church of Rome doe deliuer them vnto vs is not only a peece of great foolery but also a very high streine of madnesse and yet this is the doctrine of Popery for Stapleton saith that the church must needes consigne the scriptures vnto vs and the authoritie of the church both he and others giue to the Pope likewise in their catechisme the Papists signifie that faith is of things onely proposed to vs by the church so that if the church propose not the articles of faith we are not to beleeue them if these men teach truth further this sheweth the Romish church to consist of a packe of infidels for if the same beleeued not without the authority of the church then did she beleeue nothing of Christ seeing the Papists acknowledge no other Church but that of Rome and no church can teach it selfe Finally this is as much as if they should say that the law of the Prince is not to be receiued vnlesse it be proposed by the crier or other such like officer The Masse-priests of Trent sess 4. most absurdly prefer the old Latin vulgar translation of the Bible before the originall text which is as much as if they should preferre S. Hierome and other interpreters before the Prophets and Apostles and the streames before the fountaines Generally they forbid scriptures to bee read publickely in vulgar tongues but they permit most fabulous legends to bee read publickely The holy scriptures they will not permit to bee read in vulgar tongues of the multitude without licence but they are content that any of their followers should reade the Popes decretales or the miracles of their god of paste or the history of our Lady of Loreto and other such lying legends without licence To say that the Pope is the head of the vniuersall church is meere foolery for grant that and it will follow that the Church is sometime without head as in the time of vacation of the papacy and sometime a monster with two or three heads as when two or three Popes reigne at once and sometime a mad Church as hauing a mad and franticke head The church they say albeit catholicke yet is alwaies visible but this being granted it followeth that vniuersall things may be the obiect of sense and that the church of
professe Christ to be true God yet they teach that dogges and hogges doe eat his body as ofte as they eate consecrated hosts The Turkish Priests beleeue that Christ was true man that his body is visible and palpable but the Masse-priests giue him a body in the sacrament that is neither visible nor palpable nor in any respect like to our bodies The Turkes doe teach that after this life some are placed in paradise some damned to hell as Postell writeth in his history of Turkes a third place they know not nor doe they beleeue that their Calipha or high Priest is able to deliuer soules out of the nether part of the earth by his indulgences but the Papists beleeue a third place beside heauen and the place of the damned and suppose that the Pope is souereigne lord of purgatory and can deliuer soules thence by his indulgences Among the Turkes we doe not read of anie that euer doubted of the immortality of the soule as Menauinus de relig Turc testifieth but among the Papists many doubt of it for else why should Leo the x. lateran concil sess 8. forbid men to dispute against the immortality of the soule some deny it as did Iohn the 23. as is testified in the appendix to the councell of Constance and many other atheisticall Papists who haue nothing of religion but an outward bare profession Turkes do beleeue that God hath a body yet doe they not suffer any image or similitude of God to be made but Papists albeit they professe God to be a spirit yet most absurdlie they doe make diuers corporeall Images of God The law of God prohibiting the making and worship of grauen images and other likenesses is diligently obserued of Turkes Georgeuitz in his booke de moribus Turcarum saith he neuer saw any images in the temples of Turkes with him also in effect concurreth Zigabenus in elencho Ismaelit and sheweth that such as worship images by the Turks are called idolaters but Papists fill al the corners of their churches ful of images and idolatrously doe they worship them nay because they perceiue their practise to be contrariant to the law of God therefore in their briefe catechismes they raze out the commandement against images Mahomet neuer called himselfe God but the Prophet of god only neither did his followers euer giue him the title or honor of God nay some of them beleeue that Cosdroes was vanquished by the romans because he called himselfe God but Papists call the Pope God as we read in Baldus in c. vlt. cod sent rescind and the Pope calleth himselfe God after a cunning sort c. satis dist 96. The Turkes are not so absurd as to beleeue that their Calipha Mufti or high Priest cannot erre because he succeedeth Mahomet and sitteth in his chaire but the simple Papists most absurdly thinke that their Pope albeit he bee ignorant and foolish yet cannot erre as long as he teacheth out of the papall chaire In all the histories of Turkes we cannot finde where any Ianizars or Turkish Friers thought it lawfull or attempted to blow vp the Turkes pallace or parliament house but Thomas Percy Catesby and their consorts attempted and thought it lawfull to blow vp the parliament house the king and principall men of England the Papists therfore passe Turkes in barbarous and perfidious cruelty We do not reade that any Calipha of the Turkes did skin any of his Priests but Iohn the 22. as Platina recordeth did pull the skinne from the Bishop of Cahors happy had he beene if his body had beene inuisible and impalpable as the Papists make Christs imaginary body in the sacrament Mahomet as Zigabenus in Saracenicis telleth vs wrote only 113. fables but the Papists in their legends and breuiaries and Caesar Fabulonius I would say Baronius haue written more then x. M. fables and commend to their followers most fabulous fooleries Among the Turkes the Priests may not begge but the Iebusites and other mendicant Friers count beggery a peece of perfection and much it were to be wished that they did only begge for oftentimes they either take by force or steale most cunningly Septemcastrensis de relig Turc c. 14. testifieth that the Turkes in their fasts abstaine from all meat and drinke doth it not then appeare that they fast better then Papists that drinke wine and eate all dainty fishes and banketting meats vpon their fasting daies The Turkes doe not beleeue their religion to be true or their Alcoran to bescripture because their Calipha doth tell them but because they take it to haue come from God but the Papists neither beleeue scriptures nor the articles of faith vnlesse the Pope doth particularly tell them that the scriptures came from God and that their Christian faith is Apostolicall and most true The Turkes beleeue not that any can be iustified by extreme vnction or eating red-herrings and salt-fish but the Papists both teach it and beleeue it and burne all that shall hold beleeue or teach the contrary The Turkes albeit seruile in their manner of life yet neither kisse the feete of their Calipha nor heaue him vp to be adored by his followers are not then the papists in this point more slauish and miserable then the Mahometans Finally Mahomet neuer taught his followers to kill Kings excommunicated by the chiefe Priest of Turkes or to rebell or take armes against the Sultan or Emperor of Saracens as oft as their chiefe priest should command them nor did he teach his followers that the Calipha of Turkes could dispense with the law of God or assoile subiects from their oathes made to princes but the Popes bastardly children the Iebusites doe giue all this power to their holy father and he is nothing nice in taking it vpon him and so farre haue they proceeded in this damnable doctrin that no prince can stand assured of his life that hath any of this generation about him this doctrine cost Henry the third of France and the prince of Orenge their liues and put both Henry the 8. of England and his daughter Elizabeth and Henry the 4. of France to their plunges and brought them into great danger And of late time the King the Queene their children the Nobles and prelates of England and the Commons assembled in parliament were deseined to the slaughter and had beene destroied if God had not discouered the trechery Were Christians then so patient as to tolerate heresie yet it argueth great stupidity if they should endure a religion more absurd foolish and abominable then Mahometrie CHAP. XLVIII That Christians are lesse oppressed vnder the Turke then vnder the Pope HOw great miseries they endure that liue vnder the Turks gouernment those can best relate that haue trauailed Turkie and haue experience of their lawes and customes we doubt not but they are many and extreme considering the rigour of the Turkish tyranny yet if we will beleeue those that are as well acquainted with the gouernement of the Pope and his