vnlesse he will haue both a building without a foundation and a foundation beside the building Fourthly it is an absurd course to separate the power of the Church and the persons in whome the same consisteth from the Church Fiftly what more ridiculous then to call a forme of proceeding a principle of Christian Doctrine Sixtly all Articles of the faith may be called heads but it is meere foppery to thinke that Christian Religion hath as many foundations as seuerall Articles Finally it is moste absurde to beleeue that eyther the Pope or the Church of Rome doth interpret scriptures infallibly or hath the power to adde Articles not contained in Scriptures to the Christian faith If then Stapletons meaning be that all traditions not written and all interpretations of the Pope and his adherents and all the Popes determinations and decretales and the sayings of the fathers and Councels allowed by the Pope are the foundations of faith then doth he endeuor to build Babylon not Hierusalem fantasticall deuises and monstrous chimeraes and not the true faith the kingdome of Antichrist and not Christes church Nay if these were foundations of faith then would it follow First that the foundation of the Romish faith is not yet fully laide For as yet all their decretales and determinations are not fully published Secondly we should not know where to finde this faith these traditions and interpretations and opinions of Fathers all of them being not yet resolued Thirdly the Romish faith should be a meere humane deuise standing vpon humane fancies Finally it should be contrary to it selfe and to scriptures for such are the Romish traditions and interpretations and allegations of fathers Canus in his Booke de Locis Theologicis layeth downe ten groundes from whence all arguments in controuersies of Diuinitie in his opinion are deriued The first is holy Scripture The 2. traditiō The 3. is the authoritie of the Catholik church The 4. is the authority of general councels The 5. is the authoritie of the Church of Rome The 6. is the authoritie of the holy Fathers The 7. is the authoritie of Schoolemen Canonists The 8. is naturall reason The 9. is the authoritie of Philosophers and ciuill lawyers The last is the authoritie of humane histories But first it is no smal wrong to ioyne with holy scriptures not onely the writing of Fathers but also the writings of Schoolemen canonists and profane writers Secondly it is the ouerthrowe of faith to found the same vppon vncertaine and vnknowne traditions Thirdly it appeareth heereby that the faith of Papists for the moste part is an humane opinion being grounded vpon men nay vpon humane reason Finally his groundes are not onely changeable for the moste part but also contrarie one to another That is prooued not onely by the mutability of the decrees of councels Doctrine of councels Schoole-diuines Canonists and prophane authors but also by traditions themselues of which diuers are abrogated and ceased This may be demonstrated by traditions by testimonies of Fathers actes of Councels the doctrine of Thomistes and Scotistes Canonists ciuill Lawyers and profane writers For not onely profane writers haue shewed themselues ignorant of matters of faith but both Schoolemen and fathers haue held contrarie opinions as shall be prooued when neede is by diuers particulars Bellarmine in his Preface in lib. de pont Rom. is not ashamed to apply these words of the Prophet Isay Behold I will put a Stone in the foundation of Sion vnto the pope There also hee auoucheth the Sea of Rome to bee the foundation of the Faith Likewise in the end of his preface de verbo dei he seemeth to holde that the sence of Scriptures is to be fetched from the Popes See and sencelesse decretales Lastly the same man doth as confidently alleadge the Pope decretales as Saint Paules Epistles Gelasius in the Chapter Sancta dist 15. ordeineth that the Histories of Martyrs and their sufferings are to bee receiued And commonly the Romish Church doth prooue her traditions partly out of such legends and partly out of their missals porteses and other rituall Bookes Kellison therefore when he looketh vpon the ruinous foundations of the Romish faith hath little reason to talke against the foundations of our Christian faith For First we all agree that the writings of the Prophets and Apostles are the principles and foundations of our faith and thus both Scriptures and Fathers doe teach vs. But the Papists as may appeare by that which I haue alleadged doe one differ from another Canus doth not once mention the Pope among his theologicall places which to Stapleton and Bellarmine is the principall foūdation of the worke Contrarywise Stapleton leaueth Scriptures out of his reckoning of principles of faith which Canus confesseth to be a moste solide foundation of faith Canus againe numbreth diuers foundations and places theologicall which others doe not once mention Secondly albeit we doe not build our faith principallye eyther vpon the actes of councels or testimonies of Fathers further then they build their Doctrine vpon holy Scriptures yet in the interpretatiō of Scriptures wee doe not neglect the authoritie of councels and Fathers But the Papists albeit they seeme to found their faith vpon the authoritie of councels and Fathers yet regard them not one straw if it be the popes pleasure to determine contrarie vnto them Thirdly our faith is built vpon the rocke Christ Iesus but the faith of the Romanists is built vppon the straw and stubble of popish traditions determinations and as they say vpon the Pope who to them is the supreme iudge and pole-starre of faith shining out of his papall Chaire Fourthly our faith is the Christian faith being built onely vpon the word of God Theirs is a decretaline an humane faith being built vpon the Popes decretales and humane inuentions Fiftly our groundes are immoouable and agree well one with an other But their groundes are mutable and contrary one to another Sixtly they cannot deny our groundes vnlesse they will blaspheme against holy Scriptures But vpon their owne groundes they are not yet well agreed We doe generally refuse them and antiquity was ignorant of them Seuenthly our groundes are safe and sure But he that foloweth the Pope or beleeueth all that is written in the Breuiaryes and Missals cannot assure him felfe that he is in the right Finally it is a thing most ridiculous to beleeue that whatsoeuer an vnlearned Pope or a man voyd of religion determineth in matters of fayth is to be holden as a matter and firme Article of fayth For as well may a blind man iudge of colours as a blind and irreligious Pope of matters of religion But we are assured that the Prophets and Apostles haue truly declared vnto vs the whole counsaile of God Open your eyes therfore deere Christians and suffer not your selues to be abused by the impostures of Masse-priestes You see they are not resolued in the foundations of fayth And doe you
his fellowes calumniations from the grounds and articles of our religion And euill doth he deserue the title of a Doctor professor of diuinitie which so often speaketh against Scriptures and lib. 1. cap. 2. calleth the proofes grounded vpon them bare and rather deriueth his diuinitie out of the sinkes of School-men and corrupt puddles of Philosophers then out of holy Scriptures Lib. 1. cap. 3. he calleth the working of Gods spirit a fancy Lib. 7. cap. 7. he blusheth not to write that justification by fayth in Christ without workes is a doctrine opening a gappe to all sinnes Against Christs Priesthood this priest of Baal talketh prophanely as if the same were imperfect without the addition of Romish Masse-priestes And with Christs Sacrifice he compareth nay he equalleth the sacrifice of the Masse Of Christian libertie he discourseth freely but very fondly and falsely denying that the same consisteth any whit in the deliuerance of mens consciences from the cursse of the law from the yoke of Iewish ceremonyes and humane traditions Against the assurance that Christians haue of Gods fauour and of their owne saluation he runneth out and reuelleth as if it were a dangerous poynt of doctrine and a cause of diuers inconueniences all which doe argue that he is but a kettle-doctor of diuinitie and a professor like to those of whome the Apostle speaking Rom. 1. sayth When they professed them-selues wise they became fooles In matters in Religion and Diuinitie he tumbleth him-selfe as the olde Prouerb sayth Tanquam Asinus in vnguento that is as an Asse smeared with a costly oyntment For although the profession of diuinitie be honorable yet it fitteth this Beeredrawer or Tapster that calleth him-selfe a Doctor and professor of Diuinitie no better then it fitteth an Asse to be perfumed with Muske and Ciuet. For his deuise he chuseth these two Sētences Doe men gather Grapes of thornes or Figs of thistles They shal prosper no further For their folly shal be made manifest to all The first being takē out of Mat. 7. the secōd out of 2. Tim. 3. both seruing vs to cōclude against him his consortes whose discourses are rather like bundles of thornes thistles then like Grapes Figges It seemeth when he framed them he shooke his lippes like an Asse cropping of thistles From a man of such a distemperd humour we are not to looke for better frutes And certes no maruel if such lying and rayling courses prosper not Mendacia non diu fallunt sayth Cyprian lib. 1. epist 3. That is Lyes doe not long deceiue neyther doth darknesse continue when the day beginneth to appeare Now their lying and cogging all their fooleryes are daily more and more made manifest Euripides in Andromacha speaking of the Spartans calleth them Kings of lyes and sowers of mischiefe And Athanasius ad Constantium speaking of the Arians Miror sayth he eos sine vlla abominatione aut horrore mendacij ita falsa c. potuisse dicere I wonder how without horror and abhomination of the fact they could deuise thinges so false But with far better reason we may say this of Kellison other our aduersaryes who in lying and aequiuocating passe both Spartans and Africans and lay plots of mischiefe neuer heard of in anye age before They make no Conscience what they sweare We may not therefore thinke it strange if he speake any thing sounding to our disgrace most falsely As Tertullian lib. contra Hermog sayth of that heretike so we may say of Kellison Loquacitatem faecundiam existimat c. He thinketh babling to be eloquence and impudencye to be constancye And these are the frutes and effectes of Kellisons labours It resteth thē hauing spokē of the Tytle front of his worke that wee doe our endeauour to make this mans folly appeare most manifestly in the rest of his Suruey that wee prescribe some Triacle to such as otherwise might percase taste of his poysoned discourses But before we passe any further wee are first to examine his two praeambular Epistles wherof the first is directed to the King the second to euery other Reader Vnto Kings men of discretion vse not to present trifles or else matters not pleasing their humours or not sorting with their royall Majesties excellencie endeuouring as much as in them lyeth to make their giftes correspond with their greatnesse But Kellison respected all this nothing For albeit this Suruey be a most idle deuise and most vnworthy to be presented to so wise learned pious and famous a King as conteining nothing else but a fardle of lyes calumniations and fooleryes and certaine odde fragments of olde declamations euaporated with age Yet no inferiour person could satisfie him then our King such was his arrogancye and impudencie Nay albeit he plainly perceiued incongruitie yet could he not forbeare to prease into the Kings presence and there to offer vp a sacrifice of his Suruey a fitter offring for Vulcan then for any man of note or dignitye He supposeth that therein he hath committed only three inciuilities But if he would haue spoken plainly hee should haue named them three grosse absurdities as indeed they are For first what is or can be deuised more absurd then for a bald idolatrous Masse-priest to presume to present himselfe before a religious and Christian King enimie to all Idolaters and Priests of Ball for a sworne slaue of King-killing Popes and a teacher and a maintainer of their wicked disloyall doctrine to presume to appeare before a King whose life he his consorts haue sougnt to take away and whose Royall authoritie and Honour all Papists doe empaire and whose Crowne all Masse-priestes seeke to deliuer into the Popes hands For a fugitiue and an enimie to his Prince Country boldly to speak to so mightie a King and so kinde a Father to his Country and subjects Secondly might such an idolatrous Saltpeter-priest and a fugitiue Traytor be pardoned for his arrogant and presumptuous boldnesse daring to come into a Princes presence that is so hardly pressed with the great weight multitude of the affayres of state as himselfe confesseth yet modestie might haue taught him if any sparke of modesty had been in him we may not forbeare to tell him that it is too great rudenesse for fugitiues to thrust in among the Peeres of the Realme and for base cōpanions to appeare without cōmission among the Ambassadours of great Princes as he hath done Thirdlie if needs he would presse into the Kings presence and like a Kettle-maker stand among great men with his present then hee should haue thought vpon some thing that might be more gratefull then this scurrilous Libel containing nothing but calumniations inuectiues and declamations against that Religion which both the King and his people professeth shall alwayes be justified to be most true and Apostolike against him and all his partakers At the least if he had nothing to offer that might please so great a
sottish intollerable He cōmeth to the King as he saith armed with hope constrayned by necessitie in the name of the Kings Catholike subiects in the name of the Catholike Church in the name of all Catholike Princes and of all the Christian worlde nay in the name of the great King of heauen and earth But as the common Prouerbe is The hilles trauaile and out commeth a ridiculous Mouse For first what hope can this armed fellowe pretend to obtaine fauourable audience either of the King or State that not onely rayleth on true religion and the Kings true subjectes but also pleadeth for such as of late sought to destroye both the King and State Againe how can he and his consortes talke of comming armed with hope when Catesbie and his followers came armed with yron to cut the Kings throte and to take away our liues and when his armes are not hope nor arguments but bitter Inuectiues dartes of slaunder and malicious fictions Thirdly no man is compelled by necessitie to play the Vice and that without all colour or vizor of modestie For what is more Vice-like then for such a pild compagnion to pretend the name of all the Christian worlde and all Catholike Princes being not able to shewe commission either from any Prince or any part of the Christian worlde Fourthlye not onely all the Catholike Church but also all Catholike Princes doe disauow this presumptuous fellowes pretended Commission renouncing his impious doctrine concerning the faith and Sacraments his trecherous opinions concerning the Popes vsurped authority in deposing and killing Christian King's his wicked defence of the worship of Saints and Angels and all his idle declamations lewd lyes heathenish impostures false doctrines heresies Fiftly the Papists of England for the most part doe euill deserue the name of subjectes But were they ranked among subjectes yet are they not to be ranked among Catholikes seeing they receiue the errors of the modern Synagogue of Rome erre in the faith How-soeuer they think of themselues they haue no reason to allowe their pild Proctors pleading for others who putteth them among theeues and murderers and concludeth that Papists are to haue a tolleration of their opinions because Theeues and murderers are now pardoned We say his conclusion is weake and simple For faultes once committed are more easily pardoned then a lycence graunted to commit faultes euer heer-after Further offences against our brethern are more easilye remitted then offences that are directly committed against God Sixtly if Princes that liue vnder the Pope and are his vassals would prefer any sute to the King they would cōmend it to wiser Agents and not to such a balde compagnion Seuenthly it is a grosse conceit of a raw diuine to thinke that the Christiā world euer beleeued in the Popes triple Crowne or guard of Switzers or embraced the doctrine of the Conuenticle of Trent and Schoolmen concerning Traditions Sacraments Purgatory Indulgēces worship of Saints and Angels and such like poyntes of Popish sayth Finally if this counterfet Legat doe not shew his Commission vnder Seale and plainly proue the Popes Decretales the doctrine of the Conuenticle of Trent School-men the Popes two swordes and all the trash of Poperie he is to be rejected as a frantike forger of newe Commissions and disauowed by his clyents as a foolish and simple pleader His reasons for tolleration of Popery are either grounded vpon false positions or else want forme of good conclusions That which he sayth of the Kinges Predecessors that with Crowne Scepter and Sword they mainteyned the moderne doctrine of the Romish Church is vtterly false For they neuer beleeued that the Pope had power to take away their Crownes or that Christians like Canibals did eate Christs flesh with their teeth and swallowe it downe into their bellyes or other moderne Romish errors heresies and impieties But did any ancient Princes maintaine errors that bindeth not their posteritie to continue therein We are not to folowe the steppes of our parents where them-selues tread awrye Constantine left the Paganisme of his auncestors The auncient Kinges of Spayne were Arians yet doe the later Kinges of Spayne detest Arianisme False it is also that the people of Scotland in time past were of the same faith which this Kellison teacheth at Doway It may bee they built Abbeyes worshipped Saints vsed some popish ceremonies more then christian religiō required But K. must prooue that they beleeued the doctrine of the Cōuenticle of Trent al the Popes decretales offended in jdolatrie as grossely and obstinately as the Papists doe now or else hee trifleth out time in vaine Thirdly hee speaketh not onely falsely but also absurdly where he promiseth honour to such Princes as imbrace Poperie For what can be more dishonorable then for Kings to become vassals to lose halfe their Subjects halfe their authoritye halfe their reuenues doth Kellison suppose it honorable for Kings to be controlled deposed killed or can any free English man endure to be subiect to Italians and strangers Fourthly vainely doth this declaimer promise felicitie to the Realme declyning to popery There can be no greater bondage nor miserie for mens soules then to be entangled with popish lawes traditions and censures Base it is to endure the Masse-priestes extortions and pillages greeuous to see the land deuoured by Caterpillers Fiftly we confesse it is honorable to conquer Heresie but this honor belongeth not to Princes blinded with poperie which is nothing else but a masse or compendium of diuers heresies Contrarywise if Masse-priests were rooted out and Gods true Religion in euerie quarter sincerely receiued then should we neither feare the wrath of God threatned against jdolaters and contemners of Religion nor the enmitie opposition of men hauing no meanes to hurt vs but by the practises mutinies of Papists Sixtly neither is the Religion professed in England new nor is popery old And therein I wil ioyne issue with this Surueyor if hee dare maintaine the contrarye Hee braggeth much but the surfet of popery hath distempered his wits Seauenthly it was honorable we confesse for Constantine to restore Christian Religion But what maketh this for poperie which was not in the world in the daies of Constantine nor many ages after Furthermore when Kellison shall be at any leysure and not troubled with his Gunpowder plots of high treason then we will shew and prooue to his teeth that poperie is a corruptiō of faith a declination frō Christian Religion to errors heresies Finally to secure the Kings life and the peace of the State this wise Orator offereth oathes But Christian people are too well acquainted with the practises of Papists to trust them eyther vpon oathes bands or pledges Of late while they were moste forward to offer oathes and all securitie that could be deuised then Pearcy and his mates were sitting powder vnder the Parliament house and laying a plot for a general massacre of all true Christians and for a
these Cardines terrae or rather terren and carnall Cardinalls may goe in vltimos fines terrae that is into the vtmoste endes of the earth to seeke for their mission The Monkes and Fryars are no where mentioned in Scripture vnlesse it be Apocalyps 9. Where wée finde that Locustes did issue out of the smoke of the bothomlesse pit whereby is signified that by their smoky traditions they should obscure the light of the Gospell They succeede not Pastors and Teachers For their profession is pouertie chastitie and obedience to monkish rules and not to teach or administer Sacraments Hierome and all antiquitie put monkes after Priests and range them in another order Fryars entred but lately into the Church vnder the conduct of Dominicke and Francis Their authoritie is wholy from the Pope and other commission can they shew none Masse-priestes are not sent to preach and administer the Sacraments but to sacrifice Christs bodie and blood vnder the accidents of bread and wine for quick and dead as appeareth in the formall wordes of their ordination But such a mission is no where found in Scripture For our Sauiour instituting the Sacrament of the Eucharist said accipite edite bibite That is take eate drinke and not sacrificate pro viuis et defunctis that is Sacrifice for quicke dead True it is that he saith hoc facite that is doe this But hoc facere doth no where eyther in Scripture or prophane Authors signifie sacrifice this Virgil is alleadged where one saith cum faciam vitula But if they bring no better proofes the Masse-priests will prooue themselues as wise as Calues For it is one thing to say facere vitula and facere hoc Beside that Virgil yet was neuer esteemed a good interpreter of Christes wordes To omitte Scriptures this sacrificing Preest-hood of the Romanistes hath no proofe out of Fathers For no where in any authenticall writing of theirs is any mention made of such an ordination Nay it is apparant that the same was first talked of by idle Schoolemen and authorized after a sort by the conuenticle of Florence vnder Eugenius the fourth Finally neither doe Scriptures nor Fathers mention any such real carnal and corporall sacrifice of Christes body and blood made in the Eucharist vnder the accidentes of breade and wine for the sinnes of the quicke and dead as I haue fully demonstrated in my Bookes de mâ—ssa against Bellarmine Nay the Canon it selfe dooth signifie that the sacrifice of the Church is offered as well by the people as the Priest as these words declare qui tibi offerunt But the Papists wil not say that the people offereth vp Christs body Further the Masse-priest prayeth that God would be pleased to accept the sacrifice but it is absurd to make a Masse-priest mediator for Christs body and blood If then they bee false Prophets Theeues Robbers that come without missioÌ„ or sufficient warrant then are the Popes of Rome Cardinals Monkes Fryars and Masse-priests false Prophets Theeues and Robbers And that may in part also bee prooued by the confession of our aduersarie For if as hee saith all are to bée reputed such that can neither shew ordinarie calling from the Apostles nor extraordinarie from the spirit of God then are they to bee shunned as false Prophets and false teachers and punished seuerely not onely as men lately besmired with Gunne-powder but also as false Theeues Robbers For extraordinarie calling they pretend none ordinarie calling authorized by Gods word they haue none as hath in part beene prooued Further we say that whereas two thinges are to be respected in ordination of Bishops Ministers of Gods word viz. the rite of ordination the substance of the function whereto they are ordeyned in the popish Church our aduersaries haue neither of these two lawfull First they haue no impositioÌ„ of hands by Bishops For they haue no lawful Bishops allow the impositioÌ„ of hands of Abbots Further their Bishops are no successors of the Apostles but the popes creatures that is rather a temporal prince then a Bishop The Monks and Fryars are rather called to doe pennance then to preach wheÌ„ they are shorne Secondly their Priests are not called to preach and baptise which was the forme and substance of the mission of the Apostles and their successors but to sacrifice Christes body and blood vnder the accidents of breade and wine for quicke and dead which forme and function neither Kellison nor all the rabble of Romish Priests and Fryars shall euer prooue to bee auncient lawful or authenticall Against our Bishops Priests and Deacons no such matter can be excepted For first it caÌ„not be denyed but that our Bishops were lawfully ordeined by imposition of handes of other lawfull Bishops The Ordination of Bishop Cranmer other Bishops then liuing the Papistes themselues cannot deny to be lawfull But from them other Bishops folowing receiued the rite of consecration Bishop Parker was consecrated by the imposition of handes of Bishop Barloe Bishop Couerdale Bishop Scory and two Suffragans mentioned in the Acte of consecration yet to be seene which not onely had succession from such Bishops as our aduersaries account lawfull but in deede were lawfull Bishops Our bretherne in Germany and Zuizzerland had imposition of handes from Luther Zuinglius Oecolampadius Bucer and others in France from Farel in Scotland from Knox and others whome the Papistes cannot deny to haue bene lawfully ordeined Priests at the least if their owne formes were lawfull And from these men their successors al other Pastors Ministers of the Church haue receiued the rite of impositioÌ„ of handes or ordination to the Ministery Neither is it materiall that the first preachers of the Gpspel in these Countries were not Bishops and so called as it was in England For suppose no Bishop would haue renouÌ„ced the heresyes of Popery nor haue taught sincerely should not inferiour ministers teach truth and ordeine other teachers after them Furthermore they wanted nothing of true Bishops but the name and tytle Finally the rite and imposition of handes by such as are called Bishops is not so necessary but that in a defection of Bishops of a nation and in case of other extreme necessitye Ministers may lawfully be ordained by other Ministers which is prooued first for that generally the Presbytery or Ministery of the Church hath right to impose handes and next for that the Keyes are called Claues Ecclesiae and not Claues Episcoporum and lastly for that necessitie admitteth not the obseruance of all ceremonyes As for example admit a multitude of Christians should goe into the Indiaes without ministers it is not to be supposed but they haue power to appoint Ministers among them selues in this case of necessitye Secondly it is certaine that the Bishops and Ministers of reformed Churches haue bene sent to preach and so administer the Sacraments by such as had authoritye in the Church and that they haue executed their function accordingly Why then